ARmy Rumour SErvice

I wonder if Mr. Kim sees what happened in Libya and Syria. Both countries have/had odious leaders. Libya ostensibly disarmed its WMDs while Syria still has chemical/biological weapons. NATO was very active in regime change in Libya while less so in Syria.

Thus he may calculate that NATO is more inclined to conduct regime change in countries where the leadership does not possess WMDs, and that WMDs are a means of insuring his legacy. Hence his push to demonstrate WMD capability.

Weapons of Minor Destruction

Well, on the other hand there exists an active Russian naval base in Syria. There was none in Libya. Next, Ghaddafi, through his crazyness, put off most fellow Arab leaders. Assad on the other hand doesn´t act crazy, but just totally ruthless.

Originally Posted by SafetyNut

Were those the ones where the vehicle was bouncing high on its suspension, rather than weighed down as they should be?

Their Soviet uncle taught them well. IIRC at least one Arrser here was tasked with taking photos of the Soviet missile launchers during the Moscow May Day parades....

Of course they're bluffing, the only way to guarantee not to get invaded is to have them, that's why Iraq was fucked over.

Bluff, yes - they can't reach the US yet. However, they have successfully tested ICBM and re-entry technology.

Meanwhile, they already have SSMs that can reach anywhere in South Korea or Japan. And as noted above, you don't necessarily need missiles to develop a nuke payload.

I'll take the liberty (ahem!) of posting one of my own rants on this issue:
Nork nukes don't need missiles

South Korean academics who have met their Nork counterparts tell me that the Norks saw what happened to Libya after they gave away their big deterrent, and so now want to follow the "Pakistani Model" - ie become a de facto nuke state that the US has no choice but to deal with.

In short:
The Norks have nukes.
They will never give them up.
They don't need missiles to reach their primary targets.
They will continue working on ICBMs and every test they do gives them data that brings them closer to their goal.

So there.

Originally Posted by Andy_S

Bluff, yes - they can't reach the US yet. However, they have successfully tested ICBM and re-entry technology.

Meanwhile, they already have SSMs that can reach anywhere in South Korea or Japan. And as noted above, you don't necessarily need missiles to develop a nuke payload.

I'll take the liberty (ahem!) of posting one of my own rants on this issue:
Nork nukes don't need missiles

South Korean academics who have met their Nork counterparts tell me that the Norks saw what happened to Libya after they gave away their big deterrent, and so now want to follow the "Pakistani Model" - ie become a de facto nuke state that the US has no choice but to deal with.

In short:
The Norks have nukes.
They will never give them up.
They don't need missiles to reach their primary targets.
They will continue working on ICBMs and every test they do gives them data that brings them closer to their goal.

So there.

All very logical but makes you wish the North Korean leadership would put growing potatoes at a higher priority than building ICBMs first.

If we wanted to cause North Korea to implode or possibly undergo revolution the cheapest way to do it is to stop food aid to them entirely.

Originally Posted by donmac

Weapons of Minor Disruption

Fixed that.