North Korea moves rocket into place (with video)

Associate
Joined
27 Jan 2011
Posts
1,478
Why would the US, Japan or Korea be wary of its use as an ICBM, if they already have defences against ICBMs? The nuclear testing is more worrying.
 
Permabanned
Joined
18 May 2006
Posts
9,036
Needless to say - I don't think that satelite is going anywhere ( and if it does go up - it will last about 2 minutes ) - it looked like a cardboard box with some solar cells stuck all around it.
In fact here it is....
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/photo/2012-04/09/c_131514165_6.htm.

It does look a little simple, I noticed the little hinges holding the solar panel together, that is going to put a lot strain at launch onto a pretty fragile component. It'd have assumed they would hinge along it's entire length rather than at the corners :confused:

Also, not in a clean room, NASA would go nuts if you ate a bag of crisps within 10 miles of one of it's shiny new toys.
 
Soldato
Joined
9 Jun 2005
Posts
13,962
[TW]Fox;21643888 said:
Doubtless the next reply will be omg Americahas homeless people and a space programme.

and what would be wrong with that reply ? it would be backing up their opinion

indias massively funded space program is another example
 
Caporegime
Joined
25 Jul 2005
Posts
28,851
Location
Canada
Err, did you read what you quoted? He was saying they should feed their population, before pursuing such aims, but that it'd be a stupid critique of America to apply the same statement to them.

---

Re: India. What does their space programme cost vs what benefits do they get? If it's cheaper than paying for American gear to survey their farmland, sort out their communications, etc, it's a decent investment (as well as if they can compete with other space agencies for getting contracts to put private satellites into space). If they could get the same stuff from America/Europe for cheaper, then it's stupid. It's not just a case of 'poverty + a space programme = automatically bad'.

The problem with NKs starving population has more to do with sanctions than money. Their space program probably doesn't cost much in the grand scheme of things. The inability to buy in spares and new farming machinery and trade on the open market provides far more damage.
 
Caporegime
Joined
25 Jul 2005
Posts
28,851
Location
Canada
As per my earlier post, please point out which sanctions you're talking about, and why they're directly causing a starving population.

Also, is it not possible that the North Koreans would be in a similar plight, with or without the sanctions, because it's a problem caused by their administration, rather than the sanctions? (The way they keep Pyongyang happy, to the detriment of the rest of the country, etc...)

http://www.sanctionswiki.org/North_Korea

Knock yourself out... :p

The banning of financial assistance/loans etc and the banning of most exports/imports from a large number of major nations makes it quite difficult to buy spare parts. Those they can buy are probably significant more expensive or worse quality than the ones we buy (for example).

A lot of the starvation issue comes down to major environmental problems they had in the 90s.

IMO we are a bunch of big bullies with sicks and stones, forcing a little kid into a corner and then being surprised when the kid picks up a rock himself...
 
Soldato
Joined
15 Jan 2004
Posts
10,185
I think I saw IE6 on one of them

I saw something even worse:

bestkorea.jpg


:eek:
 
Caporegime
Joined
30 Jun 2007
Posts
68,784
Location
Wales
http://www.sanctionswiki.org/North_Korea

Knock yourself out... :p

The banning of financial assistance/loans etc and the banning of most exports/imports from a large number of major nations makes it quite difficult to buy spare parts. Those they can buy are probably significant more expensive or worse quality than the ones we buy (for example).

A lot of the starvation issue comes down to major environmental problems they had in the 90s.

IMO we are a bunch of big bullies with sicks and stones, forcing a little kid into a corner and then being surprised when the kid picks up a rock himself...



nothing on that list bans agricultural equipment like you claim....


in fact that stuff has exceptions made for it.

Some exceptions are available, including the following:

humanitarian efforts and goods, such as food and medical supplies or equipment;
stabilization and reconstruction assistance and activities;
financial or other support provided by the Government of Canada; and
non-commercial remittances.



Are you sure it's not due to something similar to how millions of Russian people starved under Stalin because of a terrible restructuring of agriculture?
 
Caporegime
Joined
30 Jun 2007
Posts
68,784
Location
Wales
Why would the US, Japan or Korea be wary of its use as an ICBM, if they already have defences against ICBMs? The nuclear testing is more worrying.

err no one has a working defence against ICBMs kinda the whole reason russia and the EU/the US have been having increased tensions of late.
 
Man of Honour
Joined
11 Mar 2004
Posts
76,634
the much more open nature by which kim's son has dealt with the west?

It doesn't mean a lot, could easily be just a better player.
Access to a rocket that can equally have a nuclear warhead rather than satellite, isn't really progress. He's just better at playing the political game.
Off course it'll take a few years to see what he's really like.
 
Back
Top Bottom