• Dear Guest, and welcome to RailUK Forums. Our non-railway discussion forums are currently restricted until members have five or more posts, and you will not be able to make a new thread or reply to an existing one in this section until you have made five or more posts elsewhere on the forum.

North Korea Launches Long-Range Rocket

Status
Not open for further replies.

NY Yankee

On Moderation
Joined
26 Mar 2012
Messages
487
Location
New York City
By EVAN RAMSTAD

SEOUL—North Korea launched a multistage rocket Friday morning, in another defiance of pressure from countries that want it to stop pursuing advanced weapons.

The rocket took off at 7:39 a.m. local time from a new launch facility in the country's northwest corner and flew south over the Yellow Sea on a path toward Japan's Ryuku Islands, the Philippines, Indonesia and Australia.

The event wasn't televised on live TV. South Korea's Ministry of National Defense confirmed the launch.

The rocket's first stage fell into waters near the South's Jeju Island, according to South Korean media reports.

The second stage was expected to carry the rocket another 2,000 kilometers and separate in an area above water east of the Philippines. The third stage was to carry the rocket into space, according to North Korea's plans.

North Korea, since announcing the launch last month, portrayed it as attempt to send a satellite into space and said it was timed to coincide with celebrations of the 100th anniversary on April 15 of the birth of the country's founder, Kim Il Sung.

But the U.S. and other countries viewed the launch as a disguised test of long-range missile technology and urged North Korea not to go through with it.

Though normally very restrictive about visitors, North Korea invited about 50 foreign journalists into the country earlier this week to see the rocket and satellite.

Leaders of other countries in recent weeks urged North Korea not to proceed with the launch, saying it violated restrictions imposed by the United Nations Security Council after previous launches and weapons activities.

U.S. President Barack Obama, in a visit to Seoul two weeks ago, said North Korea would likely have to endure tougher economic sanctions if it went ahead.

"Every time North Korea has violated a Security Council resolution it's resulted in further isolation, tightening of sanctions," Mr. Obama said. "I suspect that will happen this time as well."

Other U.S. officials said the launch would force it to halt a plan announced on Feb. 29 to provide food assistance to North Korea, which was linked to a promise of a moratorium on weapons tests and other development activities.

Pyongyang has argued that its officials made clear during their negotiations with the U.S. that it would promise not to test a missile but not agree to restrictions on the launch of a space vehicle.

On Tuesday, South Korea's Unification Ministry, the agency in charge of dealing with the North, made one final plea, attempting to portray the event as a bad deal for most of the North's impoverished citizens. "We strongly urge North Korea to live up to the demands of the international community and stop its missile launch plan, thereby choosing a path towards saving its people's lives," the ministry's statement said.

Earlier, South Korean officials estimated North Korea had spent approximately $850 million on the development and launch of the rocket, money that could have been used to purchase food in a country where aid workers estimate one-fourth of the population is chronically malnourished.

The event was the fourth time North Korea has launched a multistage rocket. On two of the previous occasions, it portrayed the launch as a rocket aimed at space and on the other as a long-range ballistic missile.

North Korea has said its previous rocket launches—in 1998 and 2009— successfully carried satellites into space. But no physical or radio trace of them has been found by space authorities in other countries.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304444604577340343672810680.html?mod=googlenews_wsj

I didn't post this in the United States thread since it has worldwide implications. The world hasn't been this volatile since the second world war. It seems like there is a threat of conflict every week. Iran has a psychotic dictator who may have a nuke, Israel and Palestine have their perpetual conflict, now this. You people in the UK are so lucky-you are insulated from most of the wars. All of the despotic regimes want to attack the United States since it is a superpower. UK residents, I implore you to stay out of any war that the US engages in. When Bush and Tony Blair lied to you and dragged you into the Iraq war, terrorists responded by attacking the Tube in 2005. I just wish there was world peace.
 
Last edited:
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

WestCoast

Established Member
Joined
19 Jun 2010
Messages
5,467
Location
Glasgow
I didn't post this in the United States thread since it has worldwide implications. The world hasn't been this volatile since the second world war. It seems like there is a threat of conflict every week. Iran has a psychotic dictator who may have a nuke, Israel and Palestine have their perpetual conflict, now this. You people in the UK are so lucky-you are insulated from most of the wars. All of the despotic regimes want to attack the United States since it is a superpower. UK residents, I implore you to stay out of any war that the US engages in. When Bush and Tony Blair lied to you and dragged you into the Iraq war, terrorists responded by attacking the Tube in 2005. I just wish their was world peace.

Unfortunately, as US's prime ally in Europe, the UK isn't insulated at all. In fact, I'd say it was the most vulnerable country in Europe.

The UK has a track record of terrorist activity on its soil; the IRA was a large former threat. As recently as the '90s there were bombs targeting cities and places of economic significance in England (i.e. outside of Northern Ireland). Numerous attacks in London, the Manchester bomb is 1996, the Warrington bomb in 1993, Heathrow attack of 1994 and so on.

Into the 21st Century, Britain suffered from Islamic radicalism. The 2002 failed shoe bombers were British, 2005 London Tube and Bus bombing, 2006 failed Transatlantic Airline Plot (which banned liquids through airport security) was a plot formed by British citizens in the UK. These are just the most famous.

Therefore, no, I wouldn't say the UK is insulated from this at all. Not top of the list, but the country is associated with the US (in wars and in foreign policy) and that has major implications (e.g. Tehran embassy attack).
 
Last edited:

NSEFAN

Established Member
Joined
17 Jun 2007
Messages
3,327
Location
Southampton
The government in Iran is just for show; it's the Ayatollahs who rule the roost. Whilst they send their offspring to the safety of foreign universities, the people of Iran have to live in a wretched dictatorship. :|

Seeing how truly awful a lot of the world is, it makes me glad to live in the UK. That said, I suspect some of the trouble is deliberately stirred up sometimes to detract from issues we have in this country (or at least, foreign troubles take reporting priority in the media!)
 

ainsworth74

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
16 Nov 2009
Messages
22,889
Location
Redcar
With respect, The families and friends of our brave lads and lassie's serving in Afghan and elsewhere may not agree.

And especially the families and friends of those that have been killed in both Iraq and Afghanistan.

Actually, I'm going to say directly that I disagree that we're insulated from what's going on in the world. The UK lost 68 people in the 9/11 attack (the largest group of the 373 foreign nationals that were killed), another 52 killed and 700 injured in the July 2005 attacks on the Tube and a London bus and since then there have been other attempts at attacks on the UK. Overseas we've had to evacuate citizens from Lebanon and Libya (when we also picked up some US citizens) when the situation in those countries deteriorated. Over the last 11 years most of the Army, large elements of the Air Force and Navy have been involved in operations in both Iraq and Afghanistan. We currently have the second largest commitment of troops to Afghanistan and comfortably the largest of any other ISAF nation other than the US themselves. So far the cost of this has been 587 military and MOD civilian personnel killed. So yeah I think we're involved.
 

Schnellzug

Established Member
Joined
22 Aug 2011
Messages
2,926
Location
Evercreech Junction
Update: North Korea rocket launch fails

The rocket - seen by many as a banned test of long-range missile technology - was launched from north-west North Korea early on Friday.

The US, Japan and South Korea say it flew only for a short time before breaking up and crashing into waters off the Korean peninsula.


Perhaps they need to feed the hamsters driving the wheel a few more energy drinks. :|
 

SS4

Established Member
Joined
30 Jan 2011
Messages
8,585
Location
Birmingham
South Korea and Israel are more in danger than the US and the UK. Where are economic sanctions going to lead us? Does anyone seriously agree think that economic sanctions will cause them to say "oh well, we'd best give up. Better luck next time." In reality they'd let the population starve.
 

Jordeh

Member
Joined
18 Aug 2010
Messages
372
Location
London
The world hasn't been this volatile since the second world war. It seems like there is a threat of conflict every week. Iran has a psychotic dictator who may have a nuke, Israel and Palestine have their perpetual conflict, now this.
That's untrue, during the 1960s at the height of the Cold War there was a very real threat of Nuclear War, far worse than anything right now. The world isn't that volatile at the moment, pretty much all countries seem to be showing a lot of restraint and turn to diplomacy when there's disputes rather than knee jerk wars etc. I think you've exaggerated the current situation quite a bit, the world isn't entirely peaceful but there's no real threat of a war between major powers at the moment plus the Israel/Palestine and Korea conflicts have been going on for around 50 years and are no worse atm than they have been in the past.
 

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
26,839
Location
A semi-rural part of north-west England
That's untrue, during the 1960s at the height of the Cold War there was a very real threat of Nuclear War, far worse than anything right now.

I was at Manchester University in October 1962 during the Cuban Missile Crisis and I assure you that not much attention was being paid to the lectures at that time....we did not know when anything might happen in that two-week period.

Nothing today can compare with the pressure that we all felt under in those days. I am sure there are those of my age group who could give personal feelings they felt at that time.
 

NY Yankee

On Moderation
Joined
26 Mar 2012
Messages
487
Location
New York City
Unfortunately, as US's prime ally in Europe, the UK isn't insulated at all. In fact, I'd say it was the most vulnerable country in Europe.

The UK has a track record of terrorist activity on its soil; the IRA was a large former threat. As recently as the '90s there were bombs targeting cities and places of economic significance in England (i.e. outside of Northern Ireland). Numerous attacks in London, the Manchester bomb is 1996, the Warrington bomb in 1993, Heathrow attack of 1994 and so on.

Into the 21st Century, Britain suffered from Islamic radicalism. The 2002 failed shoe bombers were British, 2005 London Tube and Bus bombing, 2006 failed Transatlantic Airline Plot (which banned liquids through airport security) was a plot formed by British citizens in the UK. These are just the most famous.

Therefore, no, I wouldn't say the UK is insulated from this at all. Not top of the list, but the country is associated with the US (in wars and in foreign policy) and that has major implications (e.g. Tehran embassy attack).

I'm vaguely familiar with the IRA. Are those the guys who want Northern Ireland to separate from the rest of the UK?

I'm not familiar with the Manchester, Warrington, or Heathrow bomb plots. As for July 7, 2005, after Bush and his pawn Tony Blair got the UK into the Iraq War, terrorists retaliated against UK. The point I was trying to make (I should have been clearer) is that had the UK stayed out of Iraq and Afghanistan, July 7 would have never occurred. The countries that are the safest have isolationist policies. The countries that meddle in the affairs of other countries get attacked.
 

MidnightFlyer

Veteran Member
Joined
16 May 2010
Messages
12,846
I'm vaguely familiar with the IRA. Are those the guys who want Northern Ireland to separate from the rest of the UK?

End of British rule in Northern Ireland, yes; basically unifying Ireland as one. Supported I believe by Russia and a few North African countries in the past, as well as allegedly by Ted Kennedy. Although they may have officially disbanded, a lot of spin-off groups remain - the Real IRA for example. Attacks are still common over in NI, such as the killing of two British Army soldiers outside their barracks in 2008 and several car bombs.
 

WestCoast

Established Member
Joined
19 Jun 2010
Messages
5,467
Location
Glasgow
I'm vaguely familiar with the IRA. Are those the guys who want Northern Ireland to separate from the rest of the UK?

They want(ed) a united island of Ireland, with Northern Ireland leaving the United Kingdom. Northern Ireland would then come under the jurisdiction of the Republic of Ireland (which as you're probably aware is a different country to the UK).
 

Schnellzug

Established Member
Joined
22 Aug 2011
Messages
2,926
Location
Evercreech Junction
End of British rule in Northern Ireland, yes; basically unifying Ireland as one. Supported I believe by Russia and a few North African countries in the past, as well as allegedly by Ted Kennedy. .

And not inconsiderable support from many in the Irish-American community in the east coast of the USA, particularly ...
 

WestCoast

Established Member
Joined
19 Jun 2010
Messages
5,467
Location
Glasgow
I'm not familiar with the Manchester, Warrington, or Heathrow bomb plots.

All attacks were carried out by the Provisional IRA , and there were many more besides them. Including an attempt to kill Margaret Thatcher, the former PM, in the Brighton Hotel Bombing of 1984.

My point about bringing up the IRA here was relevant, as Britain has suffered from a continual threat of terrorism in the past. The USA is certainly not unique in this area, even if it may think it is. Terrorism did certainly exist prior to Islamic Radicalism.

The point I was trying to make (I should have been clearer) is that had the UK stayed out of Iraq and Afghanistan, July 7 would have never occurred. The countries that are the safest have isolationist policies. The countries that meddle in the affairs of other countries get attacked.

The UK was second behind the USA in terms of troops committed. The UK and USA supposedly have this "special relationship" we are told, which has resulted in the UK following the foreign policy of the USA and I can't see that changing soon.

If you're looking a country that often won't get involved, ignores the USA if it doesn't suit and enjoys the benefits of that, try Switzerland. It certainly isn't the UK in any case.
 
Last edited:

Butts

Established Member
Joined
16 Jan 2011
Messages
9,425
End of British rule in Northern Ireland, yes; basically unifying Ireland as one. Supported I believe by Russia and a few North African countries in the past, as well as allegedly by Ted Kennedy. Although they may have officially disbanded, a lot of spin-off groups remain - the Real IRA for example. Attacks are still common over in NI, such as the killing of two British Army soldiers outside their barracks in 2008 and several car bombs.

I think its a bit of an exagerration to say attacks are still quite common in NI -most activity is related to crime rather than politics these days.

I was in Belfast yesterday and believe me it has changed out of all recognition since I last spent any length of time there over 20 years ago:p
 

MidnightFlyer

Veteran Member
Joined
16 May 2010
Messages
12,846
I think its a bit of an exagerration to say attacks are still quite common in NI -most activity is related to crime rather than politics these days.

I was in Belfast yesterday and believe me it has changed out of all recognition since I last spent any length of time there over 20 years ago:p

Hmm, what car bombs and suspicious packages still occur seem to show up very coincidently in areas where their tends to be high concentrations of either Catholics or Protestants, they never seem to be randomly placed, and certainly still revolve around religion and politics than general crime.

Of course Belfast has changed over the course of two decades, so has every city, town and township in Ulster, but that doesn't indicate that everything is absolutely fine now. It is far from it.
 

Schnellzug

Established Member
Joined
22 Aug 2011
Messages
2,926
Location
Evercreech Junction
It does rather make it sound as if N. Ireland is twinned with Helmand Province. Any incidents such as these there may be are very, very rare and very, very isolated; in fact, even during the height of the "Armed Struggle", it wasn't anywhere even vaguely near what we've managed to achieve in the countries we've imposed Freedom on.
 

Butts

Established Member
Joined
16 Jan 2011
Messages
9,425
It does rather make it sound as if N. Ireland is twinned with Helmand Province. Any incidents such as these there may be are very, very rare and very, very isolated; in fact, even during the height of the "Armed Struggle", it wasn't anywhere even vaguely near what we've managed to achieve in the countries we've imposed Freedom on.

I was there during the seventies and eighties quite a bit. Even during the height of the conflict there was very little trouble in middle class areas like Newtonabbey etc, Catholics and Protestants lived side by side without much trouble.

As for the Falls and Shanklin Roads a different ball game entirely. Strange how these problems seem to be more prevalent in poorer areas.
 

ainsworth74

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
16 Nov 2009
Messages
22,889
Location
Redcar
The point I was trying to make (I should have been clearer) is that had the UK stayed out of Iraq and Afghanistan, July 7 would have never occurred. The countries that are the safest have isolationist policies.

That worked fine for the US until Pearl Harbour, it worked fine for Holland and Belgium until May 1940, it worked fine for the Falklands until 1982, Kuwait was fine until 1990, Spain was fine until 2004. Being isolationist or neutral is fine until someone brings the fight to you. Perhaps if we'd stayed out of Afghanistan and Iraq July 2005 wouldn't have happened or then again maybe it would have or maybe something else would have happened we can't know for sure. Problem is that the UK has been too involved in world for too long for us not to have made enemies and for us not to be a target (maybe we're more of a target now than we would have been but we'd still be one).
 

Butts

Established Member
Joined
16 Jan 2011
Messages
9,425
That worked fine for the US until Pearl Harbour, it worked fine for Holland and Belgium until May 1940, it worked fine for the Falklands until 1982, Kuwait was fine until 1990, Spain was fine until 2004. Being isolationist or neutral is fine until someone brings the fight to you. Perhaps if we'd stayed out of Afghanistan and Iraq July 2005 wouldn't have happened or then again maybe it would have or maybe something else would have happened we can't know for sure. Problem is that the UK has been too involved in world for too long for us not to have made enemies and for us not to be a target (maybe we're more of a target now than we would have been but we'd still be one).

Look what happened in Norway - it only takes one nutter to go crazy with automatic weapons for such carnage to take place regardless of political affiliations.

With regard to North Korea the failure of the missile would no doubt have been headline news :roll: in the nations media. I wouldn't fancy being in the shoes of the engineers involved - probably banged up in a gulag by now (if they were lucky):p
 

Schnellzug

Established Member
Joined
22 Aug 2011
Messages
2,926
Location
Evercreech Junction
That worked fine for the US until Pearl Harbour, it worked fine for Holland and Belgium until May 1940, it worked fine for the Falklands until 1982, Kuwait was fine until 1990, Spain was fine until 2004. .

Wasn't that because of Spanish involvement in the Iraq fiasco? Neutrality seems to have been a reasonably successful policy for Sweden and Switzerland.
 

WestCoast

Established Member
Joined
19 Jun 2010
Messages
5,467
Location
Glasgow
But even Sweden had a terrorist attack in December 2010 with the Stockholm bombings.

Sweden has quite a significant Iraqi-born population, the recent passenger flights from the UK to Iraq always used to go via Sweden.

The terrorist had lived in Britain for 10 years and was apparently radicalised in Luton.
 
Last edited:

SS4

Established Member
Joined
30 Jan 2011
Messages
8,585
Location
Birmingham
We cannot bring freedom to anyone whilst they believe in stone age stories and fairy tales. We're lucky in the west insofar as our governance is largely secular. North Korea is an exception to this (although it could be argued that the Glorious Leader is a deity)
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Look what happened in Norway - it only takes one nutter to go crazy with automatic weapons for such carnage to take place regardless of political affiliations.

A religious nutter usually. In that case a Christian one.
 

Schnellzug

Established Member
Joined
22 Aug 2011
Messages
2,926
Location
Evercreech Junction
But even Sweden had a terrorist attack in December 2010 with the Stockholm bombings.

There'll always be some nut with some kind of axe to grind (Anders Brevik being a good example). Like accidents in the air or on the railways, that can never be completely prevented. It's the insistence on always joining in on whatever Crusade is going on at the moment that allows Governments to use the threat of terrorism (however tiny that may actually be) as justification for doing your utmost to come near to a police state (Viz. the Snooping Bill), since that's what they want; they want some outside Menace, having a population that's constantly nervous makes it so much easier for them to do whatever they like.
 

flymo

Established Member
Joined
22 May 2007
Messages
1,488
Location
Geordie in exile.
Going back to North Korea, I don't think Kim Jong Un (the son of the last leader) is really pulling the strings fully as yet or if he ever will. I had hoped his experiences and education in the outside world may make the North of Korea more approachable and ready to join up again with the South. Maybe not.

The military still excercises a huge amount of power, probably more than Un right now, and for some reason I think that Un will not last long. Either he will be bumped off in a mysterious 'accident' or simply disappear from Nor-Kor and reappear somewhere.

Either way, the country seems to be run by a bunch of nutters.

Incidentally I learned recently about some high level overflights over Nor-Kor and the income they once derived from that. I guess that is one revenue stream they can wave goodbye to for a long time.

Article about 2009 Nor-Kor overfights.
 

Chapeltom

Established Member
Joined
23 Feb 2010
Messages
1,316
Location
Tainan, Taiwan.
North Korea: The teenager of the international political scene. Another failure. In 20 years time that country will have fundamentally changed...
 

deltic1989

Established Member
Joined
21 Sep 2010
Messages
1,483
Location
Nottingham
Either way, the country seems to be run by a bunch of nutters.

I would agree with this statment, I mean i can't have been the inly one that saw the Propaganda (BS) they come out with on a regular basis.
Nutcases they may be but they could be very dangerous nutcases if they manage to build a neuclear missile.

I will also add to a disagreement to the NY Yankees comment that the UK is isolated from the worlds troubles, but to be fair to him I am aware of the way the US press tends to portray world events, having an Aunt, Uncle and Cousin that live in NJ. The US press tend to portray world events as the US taking on the worlds troubles single handed (essensially propaganda but coming from people who are slightly less mad). Case in point, for those who frequent Yahoo! Answers, some Americans tend to take the view that the US won ww2 single handed and the the Vietnam war had a point (this is not however meant to cast doubt on the heroism and courage of those that took part and lost thier lives the Vietnam memorial is a very touching tribute). It's just the press over there playing things up.

By the way I am aware that I have made some potentially volotile comments here, and I will add that I am open to be disagreed with. My comments are just my take on the situation.
 

SS4

Established Member
Joined
30 Jan 2011
Messages
8,585
Location
Birmingham
I would agree with this statment, I mean i can't have been the inly one that saw the Propaganda (BS) they come out with on a regular basis.
Nutcases they may be but they could be very dangerous nutcases if they manage to build a neuclear missile.

It's definitely crude. The propaganda we receive in the West is more subtle and less heavy handed (Fox excepted).

Case in point, for those who frequent Yahoo! Answers, some Americans tend to take the view that the US won ww2 single handed and the the Vietnam war had a point (this is not however meant to cast doubt on the heroism and courage of those that took part and lost thier lives the Vietnam memorial is a very touching tribute). It's just the press over there playing things up.

By the way I am aware that I have made some potentially volotile comments here, and I will add that I am open to be disagreed with. My comments are just my take on the situation.

Some of the folks on Yahoo! Answers I can't be sure whether they're trolling or genuinely that stupid. Most would appear to take Fox as gospel since they think Obama is the Antichrist and universal health care is somehow worse than poor people dying
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top