Click to Translate to English Click to Translate to French  Click to Translate to Spanish  Click to Translate to German  Click to Translate to Italian  Click to Translate to Japanese  Click to Translate to Chinese Simplified  Click to Translate to Korean  Click to Translate to Arabic  Click to Translate to Russian  Click to Translate to Portuguese  Click to Translate to Myanmar (Burmese)

PANDEMIC ALERT LEVEL
123456
Forum Home Forum Home > Off Topic Forum > Off Topic Discussion > Talk about anything
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - North Korea Threatens to nuke Washington D.C.
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Now tracking the new emerging South Africa Omicron Variant

North Korea Threatens to nuke Washington D.C.

 Post Reply Post Reply
Author
Message
Medclinician View Drop Down
V.I.P. Member
V.I.P. Member
Avatar
Valued Member Since 2006

Joined: July 08 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 23322
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Medclinician Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: North Korea Threatens to nuke Washington D.C.
    Posted: March 27 2016 at 8:38am
Probably of all the North Korea threats, this one has been the most disturbing. Although it is clearly a propaganda video, the question remains, is N.K. capable of delivering such a strike and would they do it? 

Kim Jong -un's (leader of South Korea) grandfather invaded South Korea in 1950
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kim_Il-sung
starting the Korean War. Never underestimate genetics or say what a person will or will not do. Saddam Hussein launched missiles striking Israel several times and invaded Kuwait for oil, despite the fact he faced NATO with a handful of nations with nuclear arms capable of leveling Iraq.

We need to look into the basic psychology, mental states, and parents and influential people as well as religion to understand sometimes how world leaders will act and what they will do. This is more serious contemplating what a rogue nation or unstable you leader is capable of. Never say never.

Medclinician - JB - CWN - GIM

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/northkorea/10522136/Kim-Jong-un-10-ways-North-Koreas-Dear-Leader-is-different.html

So - is it all a massive bluff because of Kim Jong-un's irritation as the U.S. and South Korea conduct war exercises?  His grandfather started the Korean war. The U.S. had nukes then. That  did not stop him them. How much is he like his grandfather, Saddam Hussein, or Hitler?  Would he actually launch a nuclear missile at South Korea or at the U.S. if he felt his country were in danger in a preemptive strike?


"not if but when" the original Medclinician
Back to Top
Medclinician View Drop Down
V.I.P. Member
V.I.P. Member
Avatar
Valued Member Since 2006

Joined: July 08 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 23322
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Medclinician Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 29 2016 at 8:59pm
Common sense.  With all the media talking about a threat of North Korea launching a nuclear missile and blowing up D.C., New York, L.A. or even San Francisco, no one seems to have a grasp on some primary things which are very disturbing.

http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-missile-test-20140623-story.html

The nation's trouble-plagued missile defense system registered a success Sunday when a ground-based interceptor fired from Vandenberg Air Force Base destroyed a mock enemy warhead high above the Pacific, military officials said.

The interception marked the Ground-based Midcourse Defense system's first success in the last four attempts, dating from December 2008.

Sunday's test carried high stakes for the system, called GMD, which was declared operational a decade ago and has so far cost about $40 billion.

A failure could have sharpened skepticism among members of Congress about the missile shield's reliability and cost. Before Sunday, the U.S. Missile Defense Agency had conducted 16 tests of the system's ability to intercept and destroy a target. Eight had ended in failure.

50 years ago when I first learned a lot about nuclear weapons eating my lunch while sitting in the mock-up of a Poseidon missile - I was disturbed then. No one really cared which was odd at the time. No one cared either when I knew that in 40 minutes with what the countries had in nuclear bombs we could destroy the earth.  No long flight of Dr Strangeglove missiles over the pole. Nope. Just a sub parked 14 miles off the the coast of San Francisco, with 16 big ones and about 4 minutes to spare. 

Four minutes. People had to put two keys in to even get things ready from 2 locks 14 feet apart with a secret access code. Could that be done in four minutes?

In the missiles were more than one warhead and some of them were dummies. With a little explosive to totally ruin the trajectory path but still keep on target ... well what about heat seeking?  Engines were off. They were in free fall. 

So we have these people spending 40 billion dollars over 10 years to launch a single missile to intercept single missile. What if there were 30 dummies in the sky and one live one?

Common sense.  Which one would they target?

So now we have election campaigns with debates on things as important as how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. They did that in the Middle Ages. Great theologians scratching their heads and so emotional.

How big does a nuke have to be?  Some fit in suitcases. Do you think a speed boat could use a launcher in the New York harbor to lob something or fire it? 9-11 kind of showed a commercial jet could become a huge bullet - so let's consider this...

If I needed a heart operation (and I have had open heart surgery) would I want a doctor who had never really done one and this was his first time? 

North Korea is launching missiles. They put a satellite in orbit.
https://www.nknews.org/2016/02/n-korean-launch-succeeds-puts-satellite-in-orbit-korean-media/

A nuclear warhead falling in an erratic path- or dozens of them...

Repeated difficulties emerged with the interceptors' 5-foot-long kill vehicles, which, once boosted into space, rely on a heat-seeking sensor and other complex technology to pursue and destroy an enemy warhead.

Perhaps though - and as there are 315,000 troops, jets, and some of the most advanced tech things on the planet in South Korea right now.

America rarely brags and mostly keeps their tech secret... they may be much more ready and should North Korea launch - it will be their graves they are digging.

Medclinician










"not if but when" the original Medclinician
Back to Top
Medclinician View Drop Down
V.I.P. Member
V.I.P. Member
Avatar
Valued Member Since 2006

Joined: July 08 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 23322
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Medclinician Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 02 2016 at 8:09am
It is amazing to me how the administration responds to the nuclear threat to not only our forces in South Korea, but the fact there is not doubt at all that Isis likely has tactical nuclear weapons and is really scrambling to set up operations to use them.

The terrorist threat of using a nuke in the U.S. has not been reduced at all. In fact we are more likely to see it from an internal person working in the government or pilot or someone at an airport or transportation hub than someone obviously Arabic rushing into somewhere shooting.

It would be people with blonde hair and blue eyes or even children. What are these people thinking? A large number of Isis is being recruited from Europeans and our youth. When the current politicians think targeting clearly Arabic people is a great idea, let's face it. If you were planning a serious hit wouldn't you truly consider using females especially and people that don't look the part?

Having a summit and talking about how people should show restraint in using their nuclear bombs (Turkey has very effect nuclear missiles and could target Syria or Iraq) is all talk with no military backing at all. If Turkey is hit in anticipation of the invasion of Syria - they will call for NATO backup.

Kim Jong-Un is a loose cannon. Would such a person launch tactical nuke? Would Saddam Hussein invade Kuwait or launch Scuds at Israel who was fulling capable of nuking Baghdad? 

Signs point to yes.

Medclinician


"not if but when" the original Medclinician
Back to Top
jacksdad View Drop Down
Executive Admin
Executive Admin
Avatar

Joined: September 08 2007
Location: San Diego
Status: Offline
Points: 47251
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote jacksdad Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 02 2016 at 9:22am
The worrying thing about North Korea's increasing nuclear capability is their apparent desire to explore EMP technology. A few years ago, a group of Russian nuclear scientists went to the UN security council with the news that North Korea had been actively head hunting them, and had already successfully recruited several of their colleagues. More disturbing was the claim that their primary interest seemed to be in pursuing scientists with backgrounds in EMP technology.
Do they have the means to build such a weapon? Who knows - given the appalling condition of their economy, they shouldn't be able to do many of the things they do. Or is it possible that an outside donor (ISIS, Al-Qaeda, Iran, etc, etc) with a perceived common enemy, access to fissile material, and deep pockets would partner with North Korea to develop them in much the same way that the Saudis bankrolled Pakistan's nuclear weapons program?


"Buy it cheap. Stack it deep"
"Any community that fails to prepare, with the expectation that the federal government will come to the rescue, will be tragically wrong." Michael Leavitt, HHS Secretary.
Back to Top
Medclinician View Drop Down
V.I.P. Member
V.I.P. Member
Avatar
Valued Member Since 2006

Joined: July 08 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 23322
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Medclinician Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 04 2016 at 4:07pm
Medclinician - John Bell - CWN - GIM

"not if but when" the original Medclinician
Back to Top
Medclinician View Drop Down
V.I.P. Member
V.I.P. Member
Avatar
Valued Member Since 2006

Joined: July 08 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 23322
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Medclinician Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 04 2016 at 4:19pm
North Korea capable of delivering a nuke to U.S. mainland

http://freebeacon.com/national-security/pentagon-confirms-new-north-korean-icbm/

New KN-08 based missile: KN-14

The mock-up displayed by North Korea in October 2015 was significantly different to previous years, with two stages rather than three. Overall size was somewhat reduced, with larger fuel tanks for the two stages. It was no longer built with extensive riveting, suggesting a more modern structural design, with reduced weight.
On 31 March 2016, the Washington Free Beacon reported that North Korea this missile shown in 2015 is a new missile, KN-14 instead of KN08. The KN-14 missile, being similar to Russian R-29 SLBM in terms of appearance, but with a range of 8,000 to 10,000 km. Therefore, KN-14 is also given a nickname of "KN-08 on steroids". Neither KN08 nor KN14 have flight tested as of 2016 April, but the report claimed that North Korea has tested the missiles in "all other aspects". This report noted that Rick Fisher, a senior fellow at the International Assessment and Strategy Center in this report concluded KN-14 with a 10,000 km range could hit Chicago and Toronto, but insufficient range to hit Washington from the furthest North point in North Korea.

comment: The KN-08 nuclear missile on steroids. Medclinician




"not if but when" the original Medclinician
Back to Top
Dutch Josh View Drop Down
Adviser Group
Adviser Group


Joined: May 01 2013
Location: Arnhem-Netherla
Status: Offline
Points: 94007
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Dutch Josh Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 05 2016 at 12:00am
https://www.superstation95.com/index.php/world/1115 

China has invoked Article 9 of the Sino-Russian Treaty of Friendship (FCT) notifying Russia that they have begun offensive/defensive military movements to protect national interests – including the deployment of a flotilla of attack submarines to the west coast of America.

China’s announcement comes just one day after President Xi Jinping warned President Obama that the two countries were perilously close to war: “China will firmly safeguard the sovereignty and related rights in the South China Sea and will not accept any freedom of navigation as an excuse to undermine China’s sovereignty and national security interests.”

Article 9 of this treaty, states that: “When a situation arises in which one of the contracting parties deems that peace is being threatened and undermined or its security interests are involved or when it is confronted with the threat of aggression, the contracting parties shall immediately hold contacts and consultations in order to eliminate such threats.”

In the formal PRC government document invoking Article 9 of this treaty, delivered by diplomatic pouch to Russian President Vladimir Putin, Chinese authorities state their vital national interests are now under immediate threat due to:

  •  Continued military provocation(s) against the PRC by the United States in the South China Sea, AND;
  • A direct threat of nuclear war made against the PRC by the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) and resulting preparations by the United States and its allies to “intervene/interfere” in.

We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them.
~Albert Einstein
Back to Top
Dutch Josh View Drop Down
Adviser Group
Adviser Group


Joined: May 01 2013
Location: Arnhem-Netherla
Status: Offline
Points: 94007
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Dutch Josh Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 05 2016 at 2:12am
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-04-04/vietnam-war-50-ron-pauls-asks-have-we-learned-nothing

Colonel Harry Summers  returned to Vietnam in 1974 and told his Vietnamese counterpart Colonel Tsu,"You know, you never beat us on the battlefield." The Vietnamese officer responded, "That may be so, but it is also irrelevant."

He is absolutely correct: tactical victories mean nothing when pursuing a strategic mistake.


https://www.superstation95.com/index.php/world/1114">https://www.superstation95.com/index.php/world/1114

Armenia hasRussian support, Azerbeijan is "pro-western".

We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them.
~Albert Einstein
Back to Top
Satori View Drop Down
Valued Member
Valued Member
Avatar

Joined: June 03 2013
Status: Offline
Points: 28655
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Satori Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 05 2016 at 3:26am

How Bad Would A Radiological Terror Attack Be?


http://www.defenseone.com/threats/2016/04/how-bad-would-radiological-terror-attack-be/127188/?oref=defenseone_today_nl

Back to Top
Medclinician View Drop Down
V.I.P. Member
V.I.P. Member
Avatar
Valued Member Since 2006

Joined: July 08 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 23322
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Medclinician Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 05 2016 at 8:49am
Originally posted by Dutch Josh Dutch Josh wrote:

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-04-04/vietnam-war-50-ron-pauls-asks-have-we-learned-nothing

Colonel Harry Summers  returned to Vietnam in 1974 and told his Vietnamese counterpart Colonel Tsu,"You know, you never beat us on the battlefield." The Vietnamese officer responded, "That may be so, but it is also irrelevant."

He is absolutely correct: tactical victories mean nothing when pursuing a strategic mistake.




Dutch Josh - This is very interesting.

https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-examples-of-tactical-victory-but-led-to-strategic-defeat-or-loss?share=1

Jay Bazzinotti, No one ever wished on their death bed that they spent more time at the office.
8.3k ViewsJay is a Most Viewed Writer in Military History and Wars with 11 endorsements.

The German victory at Kiev is a major example of a tactical victory that resulted in a strategic loss. In this case, the victory at Kiev cost the Germans the war. While on their drive to Moscow, the  Germans were unstoppable. The Russian air force was caught on the ground, the armies were in disarray, Moscow was relatively undefended and unprepared and even Stalin, expecting a complete collapse, disappeared on a three day bender. Then the Germans came upon Kiev. They could have surrounded it and kept their momentum and taken Moscow but instead they invested the battle. It took two months and was a monumental defeat for the Russians. Almost three entire Russian armies were shattered. The German attack was brilliant in its tenacity and ferociousness. But those two months allowed Stalin to regroup, build strong if hasty defenses around Moscow and move new armies into place. Those two months forced the Germans into a winter stalemate where the enemy was the weather more than the Russians and the Germans were not prepared for any winter warfare, let alone the worst Russian winter in years or decades. The German momentum was dashed and hopes of taking Moscow were lost. SS General Max Simon wrote in his memoirs later that he realized at this point that the war was lost, all for a city, which while important, was not critical to the overall strategy.

Medclinician - CWN - JB

"not if but when" the original Medclinician
Back to Top
Dutch Josh View Drop Down
Adviser Group
Adviser Group


Joined: May 01 2013
Location: Arnhem-Netherla
Status: Offline
Points: 94007
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Dutch Josh Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 05 2016 at 11:25am
I believe that one of the statistics of the Viet Nam war was that it did cost 800.000 US$ to destroy a bridge but within a few days for something like 20.000 US$ the viet cong rebuild that bridge (under water so it was harder to detect). 

"If you do not have clear goals do not go into a conflict". 

In the Soviet/world war 2 history; Leningrad was under siege for 600 days, Stalingrad did cost the Germans most of their reserves. Attacking the Soviet Union was a mistake-the nazi's could not win that war. 
We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them.
~Albert Einstein
Back to Top
Satori View Drop Down
Valued Member
Valued Member
Avatar

Joined: June 03 2013
Status: Offline
Points: 28655
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Satori Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 05 2016 at 3:45pm
Prepper Tip of the Day

Nuclear War Survival Skills

http://www.ebay.com/itm/381517863747?_trksid=p2057872.m2749.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT

or download at no cost

http://www.oism.org/nwss/


Back to Top
Diligent View Drop Down
Adviser Group
Adviser Group


Joined: April 11 2013
Status: Offline
Points: 1300
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Diligent Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 05 2016 at 4:43pm
Dutch Josh & Friends,

The internet is awash in reports of the invocation of Article 9 by the Chinese.

As hard as I have looked I can not find validation from my regular sources.

Has anyone had firm confirmation that this action has taken place ?

Appreciate any information, then we will go from there.

Diligent
Back to Top
Dutch Josh View Drop Down
Adviser Group
Adviser Group


Joined: May 01 2013
Location: Arnhem-Netherla
Status: Offline
Points: 94007
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Dutch Josh Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 05 2016 at 10:16pm
Dilligent; good question, 


Superstation did not give a link. By "googling" did find http://www.whatdoesitmean.com/index2021.htm they also mention art.9. Link to RT.com https://www.rt.com/news/337975-xi-obama-sovereignty-national-interests/ which links to http://news.xinhuanet.com/world/2016-04/01/c_1118506458.htm but both RT and xinhua do not mention article 9. 


Maybe an old 2001 article can explain more-does article 9 only involve exchance of information on military activity ? http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2001/07/the-russia-china-friendship-and-cooperation-treaty

Conclusion: I do not find confirmation that China invoked article 9 of the FCT-but also no info that China did not do so. Maybe art.9 (I do not find the text-I will look for that later) is not as bad as it sounds ? (Not like art 5 of NATO)
We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them.
~Albert Einstein
Back to Top
Medclinician View Drop Down
V.I.P. Member
V.I.P. Member
Avatar
Valued Member Since 2006

Joined: July 08 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 23322
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Medclinician Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 06 2016 at 8:12am
It is getting worse. North Korea is now threatening to attack Seoul - South Korea. There are more than 230,000 U.S. and North Korean troops there. What exactly is the goal of this?  Russia just put sanctions into effect and this will cause starvation and misery for the people of North Korea.

Medclinician



North Korea threatens to kill more Americans than the 9-11 attack.


"not if but when" the original Medclinician
Back to Top
jacksdad View Drop Down
Executive Admin
Executive Admin
Avatar

Joined: September 08 2007
Location: San Diego
Status: Offline
Points: 47251
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote jacksdad Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 06 2016 at 8:26am
Normally I'd put it down to a brutal young dictator compensating for his shortcomings, but the fact that China has cut him loose worries me. It makes me wonder if they're trying to avert a conflict just across the border that they fear might escalate into a nuclear exchange if the north decides to step up their game from their usual saber rattling. This maniac is even less stable than his father and grandfather, and they were both batsh*t crazy.

"Buy it cheap. Stack it deep"
"Any community that fails to prepare, with the expectation that the federal government will come to the rescue, will be tragically wrong." Michael Leavitt, HHS Secretary.
Back to Top
Medclinician View Drop Down
V.I.P. Member
V.I.P. Member
Avatar
Valued Member Since 2006

Joined: July 08 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 23322
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Medclinician Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 06 2016 at 8:54am
Originally posted by jacksdad jacksdad wrote:

Normally I'd put it down to a brutal young dictator compensating for his shortcomings, but the fact that China has cut him loose worries me. It makes me wonder if they're trying to avert a conflict just across the border that they fear might escalate into a nuclear exchange if the north decides to step up their game from their usual saber rattling. This maniac is even less stable than his father and grandfather, and they were both batsh*t crazy.



Many times governments underestimate batsh*t crazy in world leaders.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_North_Korea

Initially Joseph Stalin rejected Kim Il-sung's requests for permission to invade the South, but in late 1949 the Communist victory in China and the development of Soviet nuclear weapons made him re-consider Kim's proposal. In January 1950, after China's Mao Zedong indicated that the People's Republic of China would send troops and other support to Kim, Stalin approved an invasion.[35] The Soviets provided limited support in the form of advisers who helped the North Koreans as they planned the operation, and Soviet military instructors to train some of the Korean units. However, from the very beginning Stalin made it clear that the Soviet Union would avoid a direct confrontation with the U.S. over Korea and would not commit ground forces even in case of major military crisis.[36] The stage was set for a civil war between the two rival régimes on the Korean peninsula.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kim_Jong-un
Kim Jong-un
[4] (Korean pronunciation: [kimd͜zɔŋɯn]; born 8 January 1983;[2] in Revised Romanization as Kim Jeong-eun) is the Supreme Leader of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK), commonly referred to as North Korea. Kim is the son of Kim Jong-il (1941–2011) and the grandson of Kim Il-sung (1912–1994). Kim was officially declared the Supreme Leader, following the state funeral of his father on 28 December 2011.

comment: "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Santayana

In 1950 countries had nuclear weapons but did not use them as South Korea was invaded. The question is can they afford not to if this leader has missiles capable of striking the U.S. and Europe? One of the bottom lines here in terms of modern leaders of unstable nations or factions is what might be called the "suicide factor". At what point is an objective so compelling for a mentally unbalanced person they are willing to die for it?  Perhaps the leaders believe they can make it to shelter while those above are wiped out by a nuclear exchange. Never say never. All things are possible.

Medclinician - John Bell - CWN



"not if but when" the original Medclinician
Back to Top
Diligent View Drop Down
Adviser Group
Adviser Group


Joined: April 11 2013
Status: Offline
Points: 1300
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Diligent Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 06 2016 at 9:04pm
Thank-you, Dutch Josh.
Back to Top
Dutch Josh View Drop Down
Adviser Group
Adviser Group


Joined: May 01 2013
Location: Arnhem-Netherla
Status: Offline
Points: 94007
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Dutch Josh Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 07 2016 at 4:10am
http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/wjdt_665385/2649_665393/t15771.shtml

Article 9


When a situation arises in which one of the contracting parties deems that peace is being threatened and undermined or its security interests are involved or when it is confronted with the threat of aggression, the contracting parties shall immediately hold contacts and consultations in order to eliminate such threats.
We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them.
~Albert Einstein
Back to Top
Dutch Josh View Drop Down
Adviser Group
Adviser Group


Joined: May 01 2013
Location: Arnhem-Netherla
Status: Offline
Points: 94007
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Dutch Josh Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 07 2016 at 4:12am

The NATO art 5: http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/official_texts_17120.htm">http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/official_texts_17120.htm


Article 5

The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognised by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.

Any such armed attack and all measures taken as a result thereof shall immediately be reported to the Security Council. Such measures shall be terminated when the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to restore and maintain international peace and security .


So art 9 of FCT is different from art 5 NATO

We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them.
~Albert Einstein
Back to Top
Medclinician View Drop Down
V.I.P. Member
V.I.P. Member
Avatar
Valued Member Since 2006

Joined: July 08 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 23322
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Medclinician Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 09 2016 at 6:58am
The irony is that World War III is still World War III. I find no comfort at all in the statement, "Yes NATO would attack any nation using nukes." Once any nuke has been used since the last in World War 2 (officially - there was a tactical used in Palestine on location with centrifuges) other nations will use them. No one seems to get the fact even one nuked city is going to generate a lot of fallout globally and a dozen will cause everyone serious problems.

It is one thing to have a crazy person pacing outside on your front lawn or driveway and another to have somebody with a gun in their hand doing so. North Korea now has the capacity to deliver a nuclear bomb i.e. missile to anywhere in the U.S.

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2016/04/north-korea-tests-long-range-ballistic-missile-engine-160409084847921.html


| North Korea, South Korea, Asia Pacific

Medclinician


"not if but when" the original Medclinician
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down