North Korea building nukes? Will they be next?

Search

hangin' about
Joined
Aug 21, 2003
Messages
13,875
Tokens
Interesting that Iraq went out of its way to prove that it did not have WMDs, yet North Korea seems to be showing off a bit ...


Scientist describes N. Korea nuclear evidence
By Barbara Slavin, USA TODAY

WASHINGTON — North Korea showed a U.S. nuclear scientist an operating reactor, an empty pond that once held enough material to make six bombs, and a warm, dark substance that seemed to be plutonium metal, a key ingredient for nuclear weapons, the scientist said Wednesday.

Siegfried Hecker briefs the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on his recent inspection of North Korean facilities.

Sig Hecker, former director of the Los Alamos National Laboratories, told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee that he had not seen an actual weapon. But he said his visit to the Yongbyon facility Jan. 8, the first by an outside expert in more than a year, suggested North Korea is capable of making nuclear weapons.

The facilities "were old by U.S. standards but adequate for the task at hand," Hecker told reporters after the hearing. He said North Korean scientists answered questions in a way that was "straightforward and technically sound." He said, "It would be just not smart to assume they can't make a rudimentary weapon."

North Korea invited Hecker and four other Americans in an apparent effort to strengthen its position before a third round of talks with its neighbors and the United States about trading its nuclear program for economic and diplomatic concessions. Two previous rounds made little progress.

North Korean officials kept referring to their program as "our deterrent" and repeated an offer to suspend operations at Yongbyon as a first step toward a solution, Hecker said. But the fact that the delegation was shown no proof that North Korea has nuclear weapons is unlikely to alter the Bush administration's refusal to meet one-on-one with North Korean officials or to offer substantial concessions.

Complicating the standoff: North Korean officials denied to the U.S. visitors that they have a program to produce highly enriched uranium, another material for nuclear weapons. Vice Foreign Minister Kim Gye Gwan said North Korea has "no facilities, equipment or scientists dedicated" to this, Hecker said. A North Korean admission in October 2002 of efforts to buy equipment to enrich uranium touched off the current crisis. Before that admission, U.S. officials believed North Korea had enough material to make one or two nuclear bombs from plutonium.

Although the daylong visit by the unofficial delegation was inconclusive in many respects, the group was given extraordinary access. Hecker said he was the first American allowed into a laboratory where the North Koreans claim to have reprocessed 8,000 used fuel rods, which could provide enough plutonium for five or six bombs. The rods had been stored in a pond that now holds only fragments of rods and empty containers, Hecker said.

When Hecker expressed skepticism about North Korean claims, technicians produced a heavy glass jar containing a funnel-shaped piece of metal that was "blackish with a rough surface," he said. A metallurgist who has spent decades working with plutonium, Hecker said the North Koreans allowed him to hold the jar in gloved hands. In contrast to everything else in the laboratory, the jar was warm, and it "seemed about right in terms of weight," Hecker said. When he took off the gloves, the North Koreans ran a Geiger counter over them to check for radioactivity. The counter went off.

"The bottom line is: It was consistent with the way plutonium looks," Hecker said, "but I still cannot say with 100% certainty that it was plutonium" or that it came from the fuel rods the North Koreans claim to have reprocessed.

Hecker did say a nuclear reactor that can yield a bomb's worth of plutonium a year was up and running after being mothballed for eight years under a now-defunct agreement with the United States. The reactor holds an additional 8,000 fuel rods that could be removed at any time. The North Koreans said a third stockpile of 8,000 rods was ready for loading. The reactor operates with natural uranium, which North Korea possesses in abundance, Hecker said.

The North Koreans appear to be trying to balance their desire to prod the Bush administration to negotiate with a reluctance to provoke a harsh response. Hecker quoted Vice Foreign Minister Kim as saying, " 'If you go back to the United States and say the North already has nuclear weapons, this may cause the U.S. to act against us.' " Showing actual bombs, if they possess them, could also give away intelligence about how sophisticated North Korean technology has become.

Administration critics worry about a growing risk that North Korea will not only become the world's tenth nuclear weapons state, but also might sell nuclear material or technology to other countries or terrorists.

"You have to assume that time does not help," Sen. Joseph Biden, D-Del., the ranking minority member of the committee, said after the hearing. "The quicker we get down to see if a deal can be done, the better off everyone will be."
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
3,530
Tokens
I think the world will be able to negotiate with NK. It was different with Iraq because they were given 12 years to come clean and still wouldn't account for tons of chemicals that they acquired years before. It was obvious that Iraq had no intentions to coordinate witht the international community. However, I believe that NK really just wants financial help from the US because the country is extremely poor and cannot even provide heat for their people.

JMHO,
KMAN
 

New member
Joined
Sep 20, 2004
Messages
735
Tokens
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> Interesting that Iraq went out of its way to prove that it did not have WMDs<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

LOL
 

New member
Joined
Sep 20, 2000
Messages
15,635
Tokens
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> Interesting that Iraq went out of its way to prove that it did not have WMDs, yet North Korea seems to be showing off a bit ...

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Huh??... what the hell were 17 UN resolutions all about??
The reasonN.Korea is being open about their nukes is because those great appeasers of Clinton, Carter, and Madeline Halfbright gave away the farm in a bogus deal of appeasment which was move right out of the liberal playbook of rewarding bad behaivior...Except it won't work this time...because it is Chinas problem, and the Chinese have gotten a taste of the free markets and they don't need those wac jobs fxckin things up...China helps the US with NK, and the US tells Taiwan to lay down for China..
The last thing China wants is to have to feed millions of NK's coming over the border if war breaks out at the samtime Taiwan claims independence.
N korea wouldn't have been a problem at all except for Clinton appeasing NK and playing it out like he some great diplomat when all he was afraid of was poll numbers...same thing with the terroist issue...what a discusting,shamless coward.
 

hangin' about
Joined
Aug 21, 2003
Messages
13,875
Tokens
Okay, let me rephrase that, then ... interesting that Iraq stated that they don't have any WMDs when North Korea seems to be trying to show off that they 'might' and they 'could.'
 

New member
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
3,530
Tokens
xpanda - That supports my argument even more. If they get it out in the open they are more likely to get the US's attention and get the financial help that they need. If they kept it a secret, then I would be more concernced. I think they just want help.

We all know Iraq said they didn't have WMD but Clinton, Bush, and the UN all admitted that they did, so who are you going to believe? That should be a rhetorical question but I'm not sure what people believe anymore. Personally, I trust our government and the UN more than Saddam, however I'm sure some of the Libs trust Saddam more.

KMAN
 

hangin' about
Joined
Aug 21, 2003
Messages
13,875
Tokens
I tend to agree with you. I think that NK may be saying, "look we want to cooperate and talk about this" while at the same time saying "tread lightly because you never know what our arsenal includes."

As for your last statement, I think you have Liberal ideology about the Iraq situation all wrong. Nobody is suggesting that Saddam had our support, we (and I'm speaking for us, which I shouldn't) felt that the UN had the world's best interests in mind, but that Bush was acting unilaterally to serve his own interests -- hegemony and oil to name a couple. Had the UN backed a war in Iraq, Canada and Canadians would have been behind that decision. I guess I just trust the UN more than Saddam or Bush.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
1,119,810
Messages
13,573,518
Members
100,876
Latest member
phanmemchatdakenhupviral
The RX is the sports betting industry's leading information portal for bonuses, picks, and sportsbook reviews. Find the best deals offered by a sportsbook in your state and browse our free picks section.FacebookTwitterInstagramContact Usforum@therx.com