Seems likely they did based on seismic evidence... unless there was a very fortuitous (for them) earthquake. Seems to fit with about 1 kiloton, which is a smallish nuke... but the equivalent of a thousand tons of TNT is still no sneeze.

http://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2006/10/09/northkorea/index.html

Has NK made any military threats toward Japan in recent years?

I find something fascinating about the Japanese kidnapped by North Korea. Some were used to train spies, which would seem to be tangentally related to what WG has been posting from the new book. Some seem to have been abducted to please the whims of Kim Jung Il.

I mean, the whole failed missile launching gave me the creeps. Now I'm just scared. You know, 'cuz I live in Seoul....

Rumsfeld sat on board of company that sold reactors to Nth Korea

quote:

2000: director of a company which wins $200m contract to sell nuclear reactors to North Korea

2002: declares North Korea a terrorist state, part of the axis of evil and a target for regime change

Not that there's anything wrong with that...

Was the nuclear test a failure?

Jane's thinks it might be.

quote:

Although details are tentative, initial and unconfirmed South Korean reports indicate that the test was a fission device with a yield of .55 kT. By comparison the nuclear bomb that was dropped on Hiroshima yielded approximately 12.5 kT. The figure of .55 kT, however, seems too low given the 4.2 register on the Richter scale. This could suggest - depending upon the geological make-up of the test site - a yield of 2-12 kT. If, however, the lower yield is correct, it would suggest that the test had been a "pre- or post-detonation" event (ie a failure), as it had been anticipated that North Korea's first nuclear test would have a significantly higher yield.

quote:

Originally posted by Splitcoil:
Oop, I was wrong. They set off a wee little nuke. And now El Presidente is talking about it... and stumbling around even more than usual.

"defied the will of the international community."

I tell ya, if somebody told me that the will of the international community was that I not do x or y, I'd immediately go do x or y. Unless of course, x or y was to make nuclear weapons. Because it just sounds like a whole lot of math, and I have better things to do.

[JohnCleese]
I mean, what have the International community done for us?[/JohnCleese]

quote:

Originally posted by DataMojo:
Has NK made any military threats toward Japan in recent years?

I believe the theory is that NK uses the threat of a nuclear attack on Japan to ensure that both Japan and the US don't interfere with a forcible reunification with SK. How likely this scenario actually is, I don't know.

I am starting to lean towards the idea that it was not a real Nuke blast.
and that they just exploded a bunch of conventional weapons to simulate a nuke blast, all in the effort to make Bush look bad.

(And...Yeah yeah yeah, I know most of you will come up with things like "He does not need any help to look bad", so just save it.)

If they really had one you'd think they would be happily allowing some type of access to verify it. But their secrecy is legend right? From careful perusal of old Tom Clancy stories I thought there were ways to detect it other than seismic measurements. No?

Put yourself in North Korea's shoes for just a minute.

A 6'5", 250 pound guy with a long history of violence has publicly circulated a 'hit list' of his enemies, with just 3 names on it, and repeatedly threatened them. Then one of the other two people on the list is brutally attacked, and is on life support, fighting for his life. Don't you think you might buy a gun?

quote:

Originally posted by Bravus:
Put yourself in North Korea's shoes for just a minute.

A 6'5", 250 pound guy with a long history of violence has publicly circulated a 'hit list' of his enemies, with just 3 names on it, and repeatedly threatened them. Then one of the other two people on the list is brutally attacked, and is on life support, fighting for his life. Don't you think you might buy a gun?

Well, that is one way to look at it, but you could also lay low and stop drawing attention to yourself.

(You also forgot to mention that all on "The List" are murdering and or starving their own people. While making threats to use WMD's.)

North Korea was the only target on the list threatening to make, let alone use, Weapons of Mass Destruction.

Interestingly, they're the ones who've been repeatedly ignored and have been described as bluffing about their intent and capabilities and consequently have been spared most of the macho posturing.

Seems like a pretty good motivator to get themselves some Mutually Assured Destruction.

quote:

Originally posted by Bravus:
Put yourself in North Korea's shoes for just a minute.

A 6'5", 250 pound guy with a long history of violence has publicly circulated a 'hit list' of his enemies, with just 3 names on it, and repeatedly threatened them. Then one of the other two people on the list is brutally attacked, and is on life support, fighting for his life. Don't you think you might buy a gun?

Wasn't that Hitler's excuse for building (or rebuilding) the Wehrmacht? He cited the past aggression of his neighbors?

Possibly - but that's something that can be judged reasonably objectively. Was Germany in danger of attack from its neighbours in the 1930s? Has Bush actually attacked a country on his list in the last few years? There's a significant difference, so the analogical case is not so useful.

I have a hard time justifying anybody's need for nukes really. Hell, even we don't want the damn things anymore. The Russians are stuck with piles of them that they can't figure out how to take apart. Second tier countrys have always been obssessed with obtaining technology that dominant countries had in the belief it will make them strong too. Witness the brief period of ironclad building post US Civil War or every tinhorn dictators tiny jet airforce of the 60's and 70's or the purchase of surplus tanks by the boatload in the 80's. Nukes are the natural progression of this, I suppose future genrations will see knockoff stealth bombers and resold space stations flying the flag of the democratic republic of the congo. Whatever else can be said about the current crop of knuckleheads with nuclear launch buttons they have somehow managed to avoid using them for quite a long time. The chance of somebody shooting one off, either intentionally or through sheer incompetance, increases as the number of buttons does and the sophistication of the military in question decreases. Most military leaders that I have read actually despise them. At the height of the cold war it was expected they could be used to slow a Soviet advance through Europe but in a current context they have almost nil military value, except for the sheer fear they cause.

Way back in the 50s Charles de Gaulle (who, I concede, was a jerk) said that no nation needed more than 5 nuclear weapons. At one time I thought that this was a dumb statement, but now I think he was on to something. It seems that no nation wants even a single nuke detonated on its own territory, so even a single nuke gives you immunity from any given country. I suppose de Gaulle chose the number 5 because seldom in history have more than five nations united against a common enemy. He was also commenting on the absurdity of the US-Soviet stockpiling of thousands of nukes.

quote:

Originally posted by editengine:
If they really had one you'd think they would be happily allowing some type of access to verify it. But their secrecy is legend right? From careful perusal of old Tom Clancy stories I thought there were ways to detect it other than seismic measurements. No?

US is sending spyplanes loaded with chromatographs and other whiz-bang doohickeys over to check for radiation in the atmosphere.

They've been doing that since the 50's with U2's flying over Soviet testing grounds in the Urals.

quote:

Originally posted by Witness:
North Korea was the only target on the list threatening to make, let alone use, Weapons of Mass Destruction.

Well..... Iraq had used them in the past, and Saddam had said he would use them again. (even though it turned out he was bluffing) and Iran has also said that if they got a nuke the first thing they would do would be to send one to Israel.

quote:

Originally posted by Witness:
Interestingly, they're the ones who've been repeatedly ignored and have been described as bluffing about their intent and capabilities and consequently have been spared most of the macho posturing.

Ignored? The US and the UN has been asking NK for 6 party talks now for years. The US has offered NK everything they asked for except one on one negotiations.

I find it interesting when Bush goes the (worthless) UN route trying to get the international community involved and does not act unilaterally you all accuse him of ignoring the issues.

Damned if he does, damned if he doesn't.

Some interesting pictures of North Korea.......

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/showthread.php?t=82755