Osama's Message to America!

[ken_behrendt]

Some interesting developments since North Korea became the 8th member of the "nuclear club".

It appears that the UN's "response" to the "provocative" actions of the North Korean government is to have entered into a state of deadlock as the UN Security Council worries that any further sanctions might irritate Kim Jong Il and "force" him to begin firing nuclear tipped missiles at his immediate hemispheric neighbors. Yet, on the other hand, the UN wants to do "something" so that they will not look completely impotent as the world spirals toward uncontrolled nuclear weapon proliferation.

Meanwhile, the US response was exactly what I expected it to be. The Democrats are blaming the Republicans for the mess and the Republicans are blaming the Democrats! Just coincidentally, we are about three weeks away from an election that could cause the Republicans to lose there majority control of both houses of Congress!


Well, it appears that Tuesday's test and its small 0.550 kiloton yield most likely was due to poor design of the nuclear device involved. Chinese intelligence sources claim that the North Koreans were expecting a yield of about 4 kilotons. That can happen when playing with runaway nuclear reactions for the first time. Now, of course, the region is wondering when the next test will be conducted by North Korea as they refine their design and make it small enough to fit into the nose cones of their now very advanced missiles. I expect another test within three months.

A spokesman for North Korea who was interviewed over in China yesterday gave a chilling prediction. He said that if anybody messes with North Korea, they will get a nuclear tipped missile fired at them!


ken

[ken_behrendt]

I caught an interesting tidbit on the BBC World News this morning.

Apparently, a respected British medical journal, The Lancet, published an article that claimed that, since the military combat ended in Iraq and the West occupation of that state began, something like 655,000 "extra deaths" of innocent Iraqi civilians have occurred! Both sexes are victims, but the highest casualties were among males aged from 18 to 44 years old. The deaths are from all causes: terrorists, insurgents, IED's, assassinations, etc.

The Bush Administration immediately branded the figure quoted, which was an estimate based upon interviews with surviving family members and medical personnel, as being grossly excessive.

However, IF that figure is correct, then it would mean that the West's occupation of Iraq has resulted in the premature death of 2.5% of the total population of Iraq or about 1 in 40 Iraqi citizens. If the USA was to lose the same percentage of its population, then we would have to have lost about 7 million people.


No doubt that Osama is also aware of these estimates and will use them to justify future Al Qaeda attacks against "US interests" and America itself. Supposedly, he has already gotten "permission" from his religious leaders to kill up to 10 million Americans!


ken

[ken_behrendt]

Well, I saw something yesterday on the tube that I found rather disturbing.

An American Civil Defense expert was being interview and the subject of a terrorist attack on an American city using a small nuke came up and the expert did not seem that concerned about it!

He claimed that the US government had already had a study done of what the effects of a 10 kiloton nuclear detonation in the middle of Washington, D.C. would do. The study claimed that about 15,000 people would die immediately and another 15,000 would die somewhat later from injuries they received from radiation and collapsing buildings. The report, which I am unaware of, then went on to claim that 99% of the population of that Capitol city would be completely unaffected by the blast and that there biggest problem would be surviving for the next two weeks afterward. In other words, the 99% who survived would find the disruption of power, transporation, food deliveries to stores, overcrowding at hospitals, etc. the real source of a threat to their survival.

The expert then claimed that it is now generally assumed that a nuclear attack on an American city is now only a matter of "when" and not "if"!!!

Could it be that interviews such as I witnessed are part of some subtle "conditioning" process now being engaged in by Western governments to begin to prepare their populaces for upcoming nuclear terrrorist attacks. Could it be that they want their citizens to be able to shrug off such a calamity and even take the loss of tens of thousands of people in stride? I certainly hope not. Terrorists must never be allowed to carry out such an attack because I think the aftermath would be far, far worse then what the "experts" are suggesting it would be.


Meanwhile over in the Pacific Rim, some leaders in China and South Korean got together and came up with their own countries' sanctions against North Korea which they consider "appropriate". These sanctions are, for all practical purposes, negligible and send, IMO, a message to the other "nuclear club" wannabee's that they can almost completely disregard any serious international consequences as they each work to develop their own nuclear weapons to club their neighboring states over the head with.

Those Chinese and South Korean leaders also stated that there would be plenty of time for their "appropriate" sanctions to work on North Korea because it will be years before that state has high yield nuclear weapons that are small enough to be mounted in the nose cones of their now almost fully functional long range missiles.

I found that declaration particularly amusing. Kim Jong Il's regime already has 6 to 12 nuclear weapons that work and are small enough to be carried in one of his dozens of Taepodong-2 missiles. He paid the Pakistani "father" of their nuclear program a LOT of money for the schematics for them and I would not be surprised in the least if Kim already had a half dozen nuclear missiles sitting on camouflaged mobile launchers and ready for firing!



ken

[scott]

No Ken, the reason the so-called "expert" downplayed the terrorist nuclear threat is because he realizes it is an extremely minor one;

Until 2001, far fewer Americans were killed in any grouping of years by all forms of international terrorism than were killed by lightning, and almost none of those terrorist deaths occurred within the United States itself. Even with the September 11 attacks included in the count, the number of Americans killed by international terrorism since the late 1960s which is when the State Department began counting) is about the same as the number of Americans killed over the same period by lightning, accident-causing deer, or severe allergic reaction to peanuts.

http://www.cato.org/pubs/regulation/reg ... 27n3-5.pdf

But since you have clearly taken the blue pill, none of this will make any sense to you.

-Scott

[ken_behrendt]

Scott linked to the following information about the fictional blue and red pills:

The blue pill will leave us as we are, in a life consisting of habit, of things we believe we know. We are comfortable, we do not need truth to live. The blue pill symbolises commuting to work every day, or brushing your teeth.

The red pill is an unknown quantity. We are told that it can help us to find the truth. We don't know what that truth is, or even that the pill will help us to find it. The red pill symbolises risk, doubt and questioning.

Hmmm...I think if I had to assign a color to the "pill" I would be taking, it would be a sort of lavender colored pill. That is, one with a blend of blue and pink in it. Like about 99% of the population, I like certainty, comfort, and security. Yet, I know that without some risk, progress can not take place and life can become a bit boring.

I agree that one can, supposedly, minimize the threat of international terrorism by stating that more people die from the flu every year in the US than did on 9/11 or that more people die from smoking cigarettes every year in our country than would from the nuking of an American city by terrorists. No doubt, after such a horrific event occurs, there will be those who emerge from the radioactive rubble and make such minimizing comparisons.

I, however, will not be one of them. I think the entire world must constantly make an effort, through investment and research, to reduce to an absolute minimum the number of people who lose their lives needlessly. And, I can not think of a more needless loss of life than what occurs when the terrorists yield to their delusions and "do their thing".




Well, it appears that both China and Russia are starting to throw their collective weight around in the UN and pushing for the sanctions against North Korea for its recent, partially successful, testing of a nuclear "device" to be as light as possible. The news commentators keep telling us how the Chinese are fearful that, if sanctions are too severe, the North Korean dictatorship of Kim Jong Il will collapse and create a massive wave of refugees that will stream into China and add to the problems they have there.

It sounds plausible on the surface, but I think that the real reason the Chinese are opposing Chapter 7 sanctions (which could involve the UN authorizing the use of military force against North Korea) is because China does not like the idea of a heavily armed Western force occupying territory that is right on its border! That is a little too close to the situation that existed in North Korea back during the '50's in which our General MacArthur was suggesting that, while we were over there anyway, we should continue right into China with nuclear weapons to defeat their Communist revolution and set up a nice, Western style democracy in the process.


There are some preliminary reports beginning to come through that the US has had several planes overflying the region of North Korea where the test took place that have begun to detect faint traces of the radioactive gases that are emitted by all nuclear detonations...even underground ones. So, all of the conspriracy theories about the test being faked to keep Jong in the international limelight are beginning to evaporate. North Korea really did detonate a nuclear weapon and, most likely, will be doing so again and again until they have a reliable design that they can install on their long range missiles.

One of the sanctions that the US is pushing for would allow the US to blockade North Korea and physically board and inspect any vessels approaching or leaving its ports. This is all beginning to give me a deja vu feeling...all over again. It's starting to remind me of 1962 when the US blockaded Cuba and the situation could have led to WWIII. I wonder what will happen when the US tries to board a North Korean vessel and is then fired upon by one of their warships that is escorting the vessel out into International waters? Such an act, by itself, represents an "act of war" and could then result in a far stronger response by the American military. Which, of course, would then, probably, trigger an immediate attack by North Korea upon Seoul, South Korea.

This whole situation, is, like a nuclear "device" itself, capable of undergoing a rapid chain reaction that could result in the deaths of tens of thousands. Yes, I know more people die from malaria around the world everyday, but it would still be a totally needless loss of life...



ken

[trevie]

As I am writing this, probably North Korea is busy lining up their WMD, pointing at us, ready and waiting for the first insult from one of our leaders to accidently spill out of their mouths. We can all fire idle threats at each other, but when you have someone who is unstable compared to the first OS ever written. I can only see things getting nasty. My guess is that Kim Jong Il is hell bent on one mission, shoot first, maybe ask questions later. (If there is anyone else left) I believe that the cold war was nothing, compared to what it is now. I can see we are more under threat of been fired upon now, than we were ever was.

Solution: Gather all the leaders who posseses Nuclear weapons, put them in a room and have them all agree to have them all dismantled. First and top priority, and make them carry this out until its complete and agreed.

We only have one home and once its gone, that will be the end of mankind.

ps. Does anyone know if there is a fast ride off this planet?

[scott]

Ken, by referencing the "blue pill" I was talking about the fact that you (and most people in this country) have bought into the idea that terrorism represents an "existential threat" and that "our civilization is at stake." This is what our politicians have been telling us since 9/11 for their own political advantage but it is simply not true.

Here's another excerpt from the excellent article "A False Sense of Insecurity":

Frantz Fanon, the 20th century revolutionary, contended that "the aim of terrorism is to terrify." If that is so, terrorists can be defeated simply by not becoming terrified - that is, anything that enhances fear effectively gives in to them.

The shock and tragedy of September 11 does demand a focused and dedicated program to confront international terrorism and to attempt to prevent a repeat. But it seems sensible to suggest that part of this reaction should include an effort by politicians, officials, and the media to inform the public reasonably and realistically about the terrorist context instead of playing into the hands of terrorists by frightening the public. What is needed, as one statistician suggests, is some sort of convincing, coherent, informed, and nuanced answer to a central question: "How worried should I be?" Instead, the message the nation has received so far is, as a Homeland Security official put (or caricatured) it, "Be scared; be very, very scared - but go on with your lives." Such messages have led many people to develop what Leif Wenar of the University of Sheffield has aptly labeled "a false sense of insecurity."
[...]
Three key issues, set out by risk analyst Howard Kunreuther, require careful discussion but do not seem ever to get it:

- How much should we be willing to pay for a small reduction in probabilities that are already extremely low?

- How much should we be willing to pay for actions that are primarily reassuring but do little to change the actual risk?

- How can measures such as strengthening the public health system, which provide much broader benefits than those against terrorism, get the attention they deserve?

As Banks puts it, "If terrorists force us to redirect resources away from sensible programs and future growth in order to pursue unachievable but politically popular levels of domestic security, then they have won an important victory that mortgages our future." For instance, measures that delay airline passengers by half an hour could cost the economy $15 billion a year, calculates economist Roger Congleton.
[...]
All societies are "vulnerable" to tiny bands of suicidal fanatics in the sense that it is impossible to prevent every terrorist act. But the United States is hardly "vulnerable" in the sense that it can be expunged by dramatic acts of terrorist destruction, even extreme ones. In fact, the country can readily, if grimly, overcome that kind of damage - as it overcomes some 40,000 deaths each year from automobile accidents.

http://www.cato.org/pubs/regulation/reg ... 27n3-5.pdf

[rlortie]

Scott,

I agree whole heartedly with your above quote. I cannot remember which president said it, but it reminds me of the quote; "Speak Softly But Carry a Big Stick"

Ralph

[racer270]

"Speak Softly But Carry a Big Stick" ...: Theodore Roosevelt....aka...Teddy.

[Mac]

I was talking about the fact that you (and most people in this country) have bought into the idea that terrorism represents an "existential threat" and that "our civilization is at stake."

Terror: Intense, overpowering fear.

That's why it's called "terrorism". Intense fear has an overwhelming capacity to disrupt rational thought.

Mac

[ken_behrendt]

Ahhh...exactly how "terrorized" should we allow ourselves to become?

That is a good question and one that I have pondered a bit since 9/11 woke America up out of its false sense of security.

I think that feelings of terror, impending doom, or "angst" and the post WWII German existentialist writers used to say is really something that our minds naturally produce in response to recent deadly acts upon ourselves or people we perceive as associated with us. As time goes on, if there are no further incidents, then the feelings slowly subside. If the incidents are maintained at a certain level, then the feelings may be prolonged and, eventually subside somewhat as one gets used to the "new" normal of continuous terrorist activity. And, of course, if the incidents suddenly escalate, the feelings of terror will also follow suit and escalate. This is all part of an organism's normal self-protective response to environmental dangers.

Terrorists are aware of this and one will notice from the news that, whenever there is a lull in terrorist activity, it will finally be terminated with some terrorist extravanga designed to return people's feelings of terror to the same level as before the lull. Proficient terrorists are experts an playing this game and manipulating people for their own ends. Their goals are always the same. Make people and governments so weary of this process that they will either capitulate and give the terrorists what they demand or will retreat from the field and thereby give the terrorists free rein to do as they wish.

How does a non-terrorist cope with this tactic? The answer is to be apprehensive, but not panicky, support any organized government sanctioned forces seeking to eradicate the terrorists, and then to get on with one's life as best one can. Terrorists can, through diligent police work, be hunted down and brought to justice. Although they do not "play by the rules", they are greatly outnumbered by non-terrorists who just want to live in peace with their fellow human beings and not try to impose their personal belief systems on them. Ultimately, terrorists can not win...but, in the meantime, they can put a real drain on the world's resources and take many innocent lives.

While I fully expect another terrorist attack to take place on US soil in the coming months, I know from a mathematical aspect that the probability of it affecting me personally is small. But, unfortunately, it is not zero. It pays to keep aware of the world situation, be prepared for some sort of local emergency that might interfer with one's transportation, communication/food/water/air supply for a short period of time. And, IF, God forbid, things get bad in one's locale, hope one can survive until help arrives.



With all of that said, yesterday I, like many others here, I'm sure, watched the UN Security Council unanimously pass Resolution 1718 that requires the DPRK or "Democratic" People's Republic of Korea to immediately stop any nuclear testing, renounce such WMD's, and return to the "Six Party Talks" for a diplomatic solution to the "crisis" which is in the process of developing on the Korean penisula. As a member state of the UN, North Korea is obliged to immediate implement the requirements of any UN Resolution.

I also viewed with disdain the reaction of the North Korean ambassador to the UN, Pak Gil Yon, immediately after all 15 members of the Council voted for passage of the UN Resolution. He simply rejected the resolution, compared the UN Security Council to gangsters, and said that the real aggressor in the region was not North Korea, but, rather, the USA and her allies there. He said that if such measures are prolonged, then North Korea will consider them an "act of war" and that they will take "appropriate action" to "defend" themselves! As the South Korean ambassador began to speak next, Gil Yon and his delegation simply rose and walked out of the chamber to further insult the other members of the Council.

I will say that I was impressed with the requirements of the Resolution 1718, however. Although it does not authorize military force at this time, it basically puts North Korea into a state of international isolation as far as any sort of trade in weapons technology is concerned. They will not be allowed to import any technology or materials and neither will then be allowed to export any of their military products which were a major source of income for the Kim Jong Il regime. And, most controversially, this ban will be backed up with the physical interdiction of any vehicles entering or leaving the country that are suspected of carrying such materials.

That last point is one that the Chinese ambassador said that the Chinese government had "reservations" about...but not enough to keep China from vetoing the resolution. The fact is that whenever a ship at sea is interdicted for a physical boarding and examination, there will be the risk of a shots being exchanged. If such merchant ships are escorted by North Korea ships then the danger will be greatly increased and it will only be a matter of time before ships start to get sunk and lives lost.


I think that this UN Resolution has really rattled Kim Jong Il and he was figuring that it would never be passed because he could depend upon his only allie, China, to veto it. Surprise! China is far more interested with the steady flow of cash the West provides it for its cheap (by our standards) goods then it is in the survival of the Kim regime. So much for communism...

What will Kim do as the remaining fragile economy of North Korea slowly collapses even further and his uncomfortable supporters begin to grumble and wonder why they are loyal to him? Most likely, he will decide it is time to keep them occupied with a grand military venture. This will involve a land invasion of South Korea with the stated purpose of re-unifying the peninsula and "protecting" it from the West (i.e., the US) that seeks to strengthen its grip on Asia!

Such an action would immediately require the US to invade, MacArthur style, in an attempt to bolster the small military forces of South Korea. However, this time, unlike Afghanistan and Iraq, US forces will be facing the possibility of getting nuked with whatever nuclear weapons Kim's forces may possess. Most likely, he has about a dozen nukes which can be fired from mobile launchers. Western casualties could, if this is the case, easily be in the hundreds of thousands.

Will this bleak scenario come to pass?

I've got a really "bad" feeling about this one...



ken

[terry5732]

I would love to see Kim Junk II pull a stunt like that. It would finally be the end of him. South Korea has an army of one million men that are well trained and equipped. They would handily trounce the north in days.

[ken_behrendt]

I think I'm starting to understand what motivates Kim Jong Il. He is suffering from a massive inferiority complex and "needs" to possess nuclear weapons to pump up his ego!

For example, the man is only 5'3" tall and that accounts for why he is never seen in public without his elevator shoes and must sport that bizarre Buffonte hairdo. He's desperately trying to look taller!

He is know in North Korea as the "Dear Leader". But, he is the son of the late Kim Sung Il who was close to 6' tall and, although a Commie, a true war hero that lead guerilla forces during WWII to oppose the Japanese's brutal occupation of the Korean penisula. His son's only apparent achievement is that he is "movie mad" and managed to assemble a collection of 20,000 films (hmmm..I wonder how many horror and sci-fi films he has...). I saw a propaganda film made of him in which he fires an automatic rifle which was obviously intended to make him look like some sort of fearless leader. He had to have an instructor position the gun in his hands so that it would be pointing in the right direction!

Bush gave a speech at a fund raiser in 2002 in which he referred to the diminutive "dear" leader as a hateful "pygmy". No wonder trying to arrange one on one talks between Jong's dictatorship and the US government is not going to be happening.

Obviously, Kim Jong Il is desperate to be recognized by the international community of political leaders as a serious player on the world scene. He's hoping that having his own personal arsenal of nuclear missiles will achieve that for him.

A true leader does not have to use fear to get respect. He obtains it by the devotion and loyalty of faithful followers who are thankful for the benefits his (or her) leadership has brought to them when times were bad...


ken

[ken_behrendt]

Well, I was wondering how long it would take the Kim Jong Il regime to respond to UN Resolution 1718 through its internal propaganda machine. It took about one day and yesterday on the official DPRK news channel (most people in North Korea have no televisions and did not see it), the female announcer proclaimed that North Korea now considers the sanctions outlined in the resolution to amount to a "declaration of war" against it by the rest of the world and, mainly, the US. They are now going to be taking "appropriate" actions in response.

Meanwhile, Secretary of State Condolezza Rice has been dispatched to the region to make sure that North Korea's neighbors, mainly China, start implementing the requirements of that resolution. The Chinese share a 880 mile long border with North Korea and are dutifully inspecting all truck traffic between the two countries. However, they are foot dragging when it comes time to inspecting the shipping that is taking place between them. This, of course, is where big supplies of weapons or other proscribed materials would probably take place and is a loop hole that must be sealed.

To bolster its presence in the region, the USS Kittyhawk, one of the US's most advanced nuclear powered aircraft carriers has arrived at a port in Japan and its aircraft are within easy strike distance of North Korea.

Jet aircraft flying at high altitude above the North Korean coast are detecting more and more of the radioactive materials that are discharged into the atmosphere following an underground nuke test and the consensus is that the blast was somewhat larger than 0.55 kilotons. In fact, it may have been a full kiloton so that their first official test was not as much of "failure" as some have suggested it was.

Meanwhile, spy satellites are detecting a lot of ground activity in the region where the first test took place and it appears that a second test is in preparation. If that test is conducted, no doubt the US will again convene the UN Security Council to issue tighter sanctions and will be pushing them toward invoking Article 7 of the UN Charter which would allow for the UN to sanction military action against North Korea.

Of course, one wonders what form such military action would take. My best guess is that it would involve the bombing of any visible missile launch facilities in North Korea which would be able to deliver a perfected nuclear warhead against a neighbor or even the US. While it is possible to launch intercontinental ballistic missiles from mobil launchers, this is probably something that Kim's regime does not yet possess. As the Soviets demonstrated, one must use a very large truck type launcher for this which is capable of hauling around a multistage missile, erecting it for launch, and is heavy enough to provide stability during the launch phase. Most of the mobile launchers we're seeing in stock film of North Korean military parades are only capable of firing smaller tactical rockets.


I figure in about another week or so, we'll being hearing that another underground test is ready and imminent. The West will continue its outcry about the instability this will cause in the region and the UN Security Council will have another meeting. Sooner or later, Kim is going to be presented with an ultimatum: cease all nuclear weapon materials production and testing immediately, or Article 7 will be used.

At that point, he is really going to get paranoid and will realize that his regime is in great danger of being toppled. If he complies with the UN, then he will look weak in the eyes of his military. If he does not comply, he will be subject to a humiliating air campaign that his antiquated Soviet era air force will be virtually powerless to prevent.

It is a times like this that despots can become particularly dangerous. He may decide to go out with a "blaze of glory" and, in the process, take the city of Seoul, South Korea with him. He has enough artillery aimed at that nearby city to reduce it to rubble in a few hours and without having to resort to a high tech nuclear missile attack. The loss of Seoul would create havoc in South Korea and their prosperous economy would be devastated overnight. And, of course, that would then necessitate a ground invasion by the West to destroy South Korean military forces and weapons along the 38th parallel. Such an invasion would be extremely costly in terms of the lives lost on both sides.


The next few months are critical to determining the future of that region and, of course, the Middle East because the government of Iran is watching all of this with great interest. It will give them a look at what to expect as they continue to enrich uranium to weapons grade concentrations of U235...



ken

[ken_behrendt]

Well, our Secretary of State, Condoleeza Rice, must be having some magical effect on the leaders of the countries surrounding North Korea that she is visiting.

I just heard that she has gotten the Chinese to agree to "full implementation" of the requirements of UN Resolution 1718 and they will soon be doing inspections of incoming ships from the DPRK as well as any ships headed to their ports. But, that is not all.

Apparently, the Chinese government is "not amused" that Kim Jong Il went ahead and tested a nuclear device when they told him not to. Now that is seems like Jong is getting ready for several follow-up tests, the Chinese government has declared that if a second test takes place, then China will immediately cut off all of its oil and grain shipments to North Korea!

Wow...that IS harsh especially since about half the people in North Korea are already at the starvation level and the soon coming winter months can be really chilly in that mountainous country. Would Jong want to risk that?

The game now seems to be to try to keep him under enough international pressure to make him very uncomfortable, but not quite enough to push him over the line into a full scale attack on South Korea. Needless to say, this is a very dangerous game, but probably a lot less dangerous then letting him get to a point where he has his "finger on the button" and could do much worse the next time he feels "pressured"!


ken