• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

North Korea says fuel being injected into rocket now

X

xomputer

Member
Joined
Feb 15, 2009
Messages
85
Reaction score
8
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
NewsWires : euronews : the latest international news as video on demand
Click to expand...
North Korea was injecting fuel into a long-range rocket “as we speak”, the head of the North Korean satellite control centre said on Wednesday ahead of a launch condemned by its neighbours and the West.
“I think the fuel injection will be completed at an appropriate date,” Paek Chang-ho, head of the satellite control centre of the Korean Committee of Space Technology, told a group of foreign journalists.
He would not comment on when the fuel injection would be complete. “And as for the exact timing of the launch, it will be decided by my superiors”, Paek said.
Regional powers said the launch, due sometime between Thursday and next Monday, is a disguised test of the North’s long-range missile. The North says it is merely putting a weather satellite into space.
North Korea's long range rocket launch is provocative action!!!!
 
They haven't had a lot of luck with these things. I'm gonna laugh my ass off if it falls over on the pad.
 
Oh god we are ****ed! :scared:
 
This imminent provocation is par for the course for North Korea. Each time the international community eases with the goal that the goodwill would lead to flexibility on the part of North Korea, North Korea exploits that easing. The new North Korean regime is eager to demonstrate toughness and provocations serve that purpose.

The international community would do well to insist on strict reciprocity with North Korea when it comes to any kind of assistance, even humanitarian aid. Any assistance or other concession should be furnished only with North Korea's providing a specific and verified concession of its own. International aid can provide a source of leverage, but only if it is linked to North Korean conduct. Repeated failure to sustain such linkage only strengthens North Korea's conclusions that its provocations have no lasting adverse consequences. Hence, it finds the cost-benefit calculation in its favor and continues to engage in provocations, not to mention its ongoing illicit nuclear activities.
 
donsutherland1 said:
This imminent provocation is par for the course for North Korea. Each time the international community eases with the goal that the goodwill would lead to flexibility on the part of North Korea, North Korea exploits that easing. The new North Korean regime is eager to demonstrate toughness and provocations serve that purpose.

The international community would do well to insist on strict reciprocity with North Korea when it comes to any kind of assistance, even humanitarian aid. Any assistance or other concession should be furnished only with North Korea's providing a specific and verified concession of its own. International aid can provide a source of leverage, but only if it is linked to North Korean conduct. Repeated failure to sustain such linkage only strengthens North Korea's conclusions that its provocations have no lasting adverse consequences. Hence, it finds the cost-benefit calculation in its favor and continues to engage in provocations, not to mention its ongoing illicit nuclear activities.
Click to expand...

The more we ignore them, the more they have hissy fits. How far do you propose to let them go? Their provocations can be strong at times and may force a conflict before diplomacy could have an effect. SK is becoming more fed up with NK's antogonism. The next artillery attack may create an SK military response before diplomacy can smooth things over.
 
I guess the boy wants to show he owns big boy pants just like daddy.
 
American said:
I guess the boy wants to show he owns big boy pants just like daddy.
Click to expand...

I'm thinking the boy has less to show off to us than he does to his own generals. I'd be willing to be that that country is an armpit hair away from a military coup and Il is trying to preserve an image of toughness so as to not give a crevasse of light for the generals to use an excuse to boot him for being too weak.
 
Yesterday in North Korea a large earth quake is destroy the all Properties. Now what about the position of Rocket Launching.
 
NK has a history of disguising missile tests as satellites.
Click to expand...

Ah, so that's it. Any time they launch anything you're going to get your panties in a bunch and call it a "provocation".
 
Khayembii Communique said:
I don't see how launching a weather satellite is a hissy fit.
Click to expand...

Oh yeah, North Korea is one of the world's leaders in satellite technology :roll: I guess technically a meteorite is a satellite, so if they put a rock in the nose cone of their ICBM, they could "technically" call the mission "launching a satellite."

I suppose if their "satellite launch" doesn't "just so happen" to wander in the direction of the Philippines or Japan then no harm is done. But if that sucker strays, you can be sure allied forces will be conducting spontaneous "satellite launches" with ABM systems.
 
Ahead of the illicit rocket test, the U.S. warned North Korea that it would cut off its resumption of food aid. In the wake of the failed test, the U.S. appears to have retreated on that position. Reuters reported, "The White House alluded to North Korea's chronic food shortages but did not address whether Washington would carry through on a tentative deal to provide nutritional assistance to the country." This ambiguity is not helpful. Failure to follow through on cutting off the aid would be even worse. Both acts suggest that U.S. threats of adverse consequences for North Korea's provocations are hollow. As a result, North Korea would continue to have strong incentives to pursue its illicit activities and provocations, calculating that there are either no lasting consequences (U.S. has always resumed food aid after interruptions without receiving concrete changes from North Korea) or none at all in cases (if the U.S. fails to follow through).
 
Khayembii Communique said:
I don't see how launching a weather satellite is a hissy fit.
Click to expand...

Except it wasn't a weather satellite. According to the NK press release it was a test to see if it would take a greater amount of time for this rocket to crash and burn than the last one did. According to this criteria, the launch was a stunning success. :mrgreen:

NOTE: And it wasn't just fuel being pumped into the rocket. It was also a lot of bad mojo. LOL.
 
Last edited:
danarhea said:
Except it wasn't a weather satellite. According to the NK press release it was a test to see if it would take a greater amount of time for this rocket to crash and burn than the last one did. According to this criteria, the launch was a stunning success.
Click to expand...

It took the Soviets and I believe the Americans as well multiple attempts before their ICBM launches were successful. I don't see how this is any different TBH, considering the fact that the DPRK is isolated to the point where they're essentially reinventing the wheel.
 
danarhea said:
Except it wasn't a weather satellite. According to the NK press release it was a test to see if it would take a greater amount of time for this rocket to crash and burn than the last one did. According to this criteria, the launch was a stunning success. :mrgreen:

NOTE: And it wasn't just fuel being pumped into the rocket. It was also a lot of bad mojo. LOL.
Click to expand...

I don't know about you, but I'm feelin' pretty bad for the monkey..
 
henrypanda said:
Soon after the launch, the White House said the North had violated UN security council resolutions banning it from developing long-range missile technology, adding that it risked even greater isolation.
Click to expand...

6. Is this legal?

After North Korea conducted missile tests and a test of a nuclear weapon in 2006, and again in 2009, the UN Security Council passed a number of resolutions demanding that North Korea halt its nuclear weapons and ballistic missile programs. United Nations Security Council Resolution (UNSCR) 1718 states that "that the DPRK shall suspend all activities related to its ballistic missile programme and in this context re-establish its pre-existing commitments to a moratorium on missile launching." UNSCR 1874 "demands that the DPRK not conduct any further nuclear test or any launch using ballistic missile technology."

North Korean officials claim that the Security Council Resolutions are illegal and that under the Outer Space Treaty, which North Korea signed just before its April 2009 launch, it has a right to right to the peaceful exploration of space. The vast majority of states that operate satellites in orbit do not have their own rocket programs, but rather purchase launch services from commercial vendors in a handful of countries.

Source
 
Khayembii Communique said:
6. Is this legal?

After North Korea conducted missile tests and a test of a nuclear weapon in 2006, and again in 2009, the UN Security Council passed a number of resolutions demanding that North Korea halt its nuclear weapons and ballistic missile programs. United Nations Security Council Resolution (UNSCR) 1718 states that "that the DPRK shall suspend all activities related to its ballistic missile programme and in this context re-establish its pre-existing commitments to a moratorium on missile launching." UNSCR 1874 "demands that the DPRK not conduct any further nuclear test or any launch using ballistic missile technology."

North Korean officials claim that the Security Council Resolutions are illegal and that under the Outer Space Treaty, which North Korea signed just before its April 2009 launch, it has a right to right to the peaceful exploration of space. The vast majority of states that operate satellites in orbit do not have their own rocket programs, but rather purchase launch services from commercial vendors in a handful of countries.

Source
Click to expand...

Legal or not, if North Korea is unable to feed their own people, doesn't it seem odd that they spend their money on "exploring space?" Shouldn't they be spending their efforts on "exploring" ways to keep the populace healthy?
 
EagleAye said:
Legal or not, if North Korea is unable to feed their own people, doesn't it seem odd that they spend their money on "exploring space?" Shouldn't they be spending their efforts on "exploring" ways to keep the populace healthy?
Click to expand...

First I don't see what this has to do with the thread, which is about the DPRK rocket launch. Nor do I see what it has to do with what I posted that you quoted (or what I posted anywhere in this thread, for that matter), which dealt strictly with the legality of the launch under international law.

Second, there really isn't any evidence that I have seen that "North Korea is unable to feed their own people". There are some refugee reports, but these are not really reliable in themselves as evidence. This is not to say that it is not true, but merely that I do not jump to conclusions based on hearsay.

Third, North Korea's healthcare system has been lauded by the WHO (WHO director general Margaret Chan in April 2010 after a visit to the country called the North Korean healthcare system "the envy of the developing world"). As an aside, and emphasis on my former point, Amnesty International has taken quite a different position, based solely on refugee reports. This is a good example of why it is silly to rely on refugee reports as well as the massive amount of unsubstantiated claims being thrown around.

Fourth, talking about what a state "should" or "shouldn't" do is absolutely silly. For example, the US government "should" be working towards providing healthcare for its citizens, but it is not. You gain more insight into the functioning of a state when you ask why it does what it does and don't deal with futile "should's".
 
Last edited:
poweRob said:
I'm thinking the boy has less to show off to us than he does to his own generals. I'd be willing to be that that country is an armpit hair away from a military coup and Il is trying to preserve an image of toughness so as to not give a crevasse of light for the generals to use an excuse to boot him for being too weak.
Click to expand...

Well his next project is to blow up an atom bomb. I hope it goes worse than the last one, which was also a failure.
 
Khayembii Communique said:
First I don't see what this has to do with the thread, which is about the DPRK rocket launch. Nor do I see what it has to do with what I posted that you quoted (or what I posted anywhere in this thread, for that matter), which dealt strictly with the legality of the launch under international law.

Second, there really isn't any evidence that I have seen that "North Korea is unable to feed their own people". There are some refugee reports, but these are not really reliable in themselves as evidence. This is not to say that it is not true, but merely that I do not jump to conclusions based on hearsay.

Third, North Korea's healthcare system has been lauded by the WHO (WHO director general Margaret Chan in April 2010 after a visit to the country called the North Korean healthcare system "the envy of the developing world"). As an aside, and emphasis on my former point, Amnesty International has taken quite a different position, based solely on refugee reports. This is a good example of why it is silly to rely on refugee reports as well as the massive amount of unsubstantiated claims being thrown around.

Fourth, talking about what a state "should" or "shouldn't" do is absolutely silly. For example, the US government "should" be working towards providing healthcare for its citizens, but it is not. You gain more insight into the functioning of a state when you ask why it does what it does and don't deal with futile "should's".
Click to expand...

It relates because, NK sacrifices an arrangement to receive food from the US by launching this rocket. If the rocket launch is only about "space exploration" as you assert, it seems like they are placing a national "luxury item" ahead of feeding their people. If the rocket had a military purpose (perhaps a saleable one later on) it would make more sense, but you claim it's not.

My comment about keeping the "people heathy" is related to food supply, not specifically pharmaceuticals. Good food, and good quantities of it, contributes significantly to good health. But if you would still claim that North Koreans are well fed, then why would they strike yet another deal for food? And why sacrifice this for "space exploration" which cannot contribute to the food supply? Consider this as well:

The shortages have again made North Korea a ward of the international community. At the request of Pyongyang, the World Food Program (WFP) has stepped up its relief effort in recent months. The agency plans to provide food in the coming weeks for more than 6 million North Koreans — about a quarter of the population. In certain parts of the country, particularly the northeast, the situation is "reaching a level of humanitarian emergency," says Jean-Pierre de Margerie, the WFP's country director for North Korea in Pyongyang.
Click to expand...
The Real Crisis in North Korea? Food - TIME

This is NOT anecdotal evidence from refugees. This is a large organization that must step in and help. If the WFP must step in to provide food then North Koreans must not be getting enough food. If they aren't fed enough then how can their health be the envy of the world? If they aren't fed well enough, why isn't NK improving it's agriculture instead of developing nuclear weapons and "space exploration?"
 
EagleAye said:
It relates because, NK sacrifices an arrangement to receive food from the US by launching this rocket. If the rocket launch is only about "space exploration" as you assert, it seems like they are placing a national "luxury item" ahead of feeding their people.
Click to expand...

Well, I don't really think one can necessarily conclude that a satellite is a "national luxury item" as you have here. Perhaps the government was planning on using this satellite to monitor weather patterns and climate, and assist in surveying for potential improvements to their agricultural system. This is speculation, but my point is that it is very possible that this isn't a "luxury item". My personal (speculative, unfounded) opinion is that this was the case, as I don't think the DPRK would have invested so heavily into such a program without it being so.

If the rocket had a military purpose (perhaps a saleable one later on) it would make more sense, but you claim it's not.
Click to expand...

I don't claim that it doesn't have a military purpose. All space programs have both military and civilian advantages. However, I think that people who are claiming that this wasn't an attempted satellite launch don't have a leg on which to stand - after all, the outcome for the DPRK is the same regardless, and they openly admit when they are testing ICBM's, so why would they suddenly hide it now?

Granted, a satellite rocket is just an ICBM with a satellite stuck on the top and some staging/control modifications - think of the SM-65 Atlas, the first American ICBM which was used to launch satellites into space for about a decade - so I do think, as I said earlier, that this had both civilian as well as military advantages.

My comment about keeping the "people heathy" is related to food supply, not specifically pharmaceuticals. Good food, and good quantities of it, contributes significantly to good health. But if you would still claim that North Koreans are well fed, then why would they strike yet another deal for food?
Click to expand...

I never claimed that North Koreans were well fed. I stated that I haven't seen evidence of recent food crises in the country that isn't solely based on refugee reports.

This is NOT anecdotal evidence from refugees. This is a large organization that must step in and help. If the WFP must step in to provide food then North Koreans must not be getting enough food.
Click to expand...

You're right, it's not, thank you for this. Though, again, I don't see this substantiating the idea that there is mass starvation or anything in the country, as many people claim; indeed, the WFP's page on their North Korean program states:

WFP said:
While malnutrition rates among children have decreased the last decade, one in every three children remains chronically malnourished or ‘stunted’, meaning they are too short for their age. A quarter of all pregnant and breast-feeding women are also malnourished. A Crop and Food Supply Assessment Mission (CFSAM) in October last year noted that a small shock in the future could trigger a severe crisis which would be difficult to contain if these chronic deficits are not effectively managed.
Click to expand...

So malnutrition has decreased, but it is still a significant problem; and there are significant problems with North Korea's food system, but it is not currently undergoing a "severe crisis".

If they aren't fed enough then how can their health be the envy of the world?
Click to expand...

The WHO's assessment was of their healthcare industry and not of "their health". Particularly, the abundance of doctors and level of coverage North Korean citizens receive. Chan, in her report, recognized that malnutrition was a problem.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom