Britain 'prepares for war with North Korea' while 'new carrier could be rushed into service'

[transam]

If nut job cheese head lights the fuse to one of his toys and kills millions then l look forward to comments here....

[Catoni]

On 2017-10-10 at 4:32 AM, anto said:

You wake up .Its America want War WAR .They have 2 Countries left on their agenda to invade ,N.Korea and Iran .( Read up what General Wesley Clark is saying ) .Kim is just defending his Country .

    Sure..... whatever you say......."comrade".   Now go back to reading your copy of Chairman Mao's Little Red Book.

        555555  

[Catoni]

23 hours ago, baboon said:

Not these old canards again...

1. When the DPRK roll their tanks into a foreign countries as Hitler did then let's start comparing the situation to WW II.

2. No we have not been negotiating with them on their nuclear weapons program for most of the past 40 years or more.

3. Since talks and negotiations have led to sanction after sanction, how is that benefiting them, exactly? 

 

Your Unfortunately wrong...  I don't know why you would trust murderous dictator Kim Jong-un who executes members of his own family with anti-aircraft gun... and has his own girlfriend shot... over the highly respected International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

    Do you like totalitarian one party dicatorship prison countries  ? ?  

    Or is it just simple admiration for Kim Jong-un ? ? 

   Partial List of Negotiations.... and Record of Violations by North Korea from The Arms Control Association

Full Up-to-date list here:    https://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/dprkchron

  1985

December 12, 1985: North Korea accedes to the nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) but does not complete a safeguards agreement with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Under Article III of the NPT, North Korea has 18 months to conclude such an arrangement. In coming years, North Korea links adherence to this provision of the treaty to the withdrawal of U.S. nuclear weapons from South Korea.

1991

September 27, 1991: President George Bush announces the unilateral withdrawal of all naval and land-based tactical nuclear weapons deployed abroad. Approximately 100 U.S. nuclear weapons had been based in South Korea. Eight days later, Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev reciprocates.

November 8, 1991: In response to President Bush’s unilateral move, President Roh Tae Woo of South Korea announces the Declaration on the Denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula, under which South Korea promises not to produce, possess, store, deploy, or use nuclear weapons. In addition, the declaration unilaterally prohibits South Korea from possessing nuclear reprocessing or uranium enrichment facilities. These promises, if enacted, would satisfy all of North Korea’s conditions for allowing IAEA inspections of its nuclear facilities.

December 31, 1991: The two Koreas sign the South-North Joint Declaration on the Denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula. Under the declaration, both countries agree not to “test, manufacture, produce, receive, possess, store, deploy or use nuclear weapons” or to “possess nuclear reprocessing and uranium enrichment facilities.” They also agree to mutual inspections for verification.

1992

January 30, 1992: More than six years after signing the NPT, North Korea concludes a comprehensive safeguards agreement with the IAEA.

March 6, 1992: The United States imposes sanctions on North Korea’s Lyongaksan Machineries and Equipment Export Corporation and Changgwang Sinyong Corporation for missile proliferation activities.*

April 9, 1992: North Korea ratifies the safeguards agreement with the IAEA.

May 4, 1992: North Korea submits its nuclear material declarations to the IAEA, declaring seven sites and some 90 grams of plutonium that could be subject to IAEA inspection. Pyongyang claims that the nuclear material was the result of reprocessing 89 defective fuel rods in 1989. The IAEA conducted inspections to verify the completeness of this declaration from mid-1992 to early 1993.

June 23, 1992: The United States imposes “missile sanctions” on the North Korean entities sanctioned in March.*

September 1992: IAEA inspectors discover discrepancies in North Korea’s “initial report” on its nuclear program and ask for clarification on several issues, including the amount of reprocessed plutonium in North Korea.

1993

February 9, 1993: The IAEA demands special inspections of two sites that are believed to store nuclear waste. The request is based on strong evidence that North Korea has been cheating on its commitments under the NPT. North Korea refuses the IAEA’s request.

March 12, 1993: Amid demands for special inspections, North Korea announces its intention to withdraw from the NPT in three months, citing Article X provisions that allow withdrawal for supreme national security considerations.

April 1, 1993: The IAEA declares that North Korea is not adhering to its safeguards agreement and that it cannot guarantee that North Korean nuclear material is not being diverted for nonpeaceful uses.

June 11, 1993: Following talks with the United States in New York, North Korea suspends its decision to pull out of the NPT just before the withdrawal would have become legally effective. North Korea also agrees to the full and impartial application of IAEA safeguards.

For its part, the United States grants assurances against the threat and use of force, including nuclear weapons. Washington also promises not to interfere with North Korea’s internal affairs.

July 19, 1993: After a second round of talks with the United States, North Korea announces in a joint statement that it is “prepared to begin consultations with the IAEA on outstanding safeguards and other issues” and that it is ready to negotiate IAEA inspections of its nuclear facilities. The joint statement also indicates that Pyongyang might consider a deal with the United States to replace its graphite nuclear reactors with light-water reactors (LWRs), which are proliferation resistant.

Late 1993: The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and the Defense Intelligence Agency estimate that North Korea had separated about 12 kilograms of plutonium. This amount is enough for at least one or two nuclear weapons.

1994

January 1994: The director of the CIA estimates that North Korea may have produced one or two nuclear weapons.

February 15, 1994: North Korea finalizes an agreement with the IAEA to allow inspections of all seven of its declared nuclear facilities, averting sanctions by the United Nations Security Council.

March 1, 1994: IAEA inspectors arrive in North Korea for the first inspections since 1993.

March 21, 1994: Responding to North Korea’s refusal to allow the inspection team to inspect a plutonium reprocessing plant at Yongbyon, the IAEA Board of Governors approves a resolution calling on North Korea to “immediately allow the IAEA to complete all requested inspection activities and to comply fully with its safeguards agreements.”

May 19, 1994: The IAEA confirms that North Korea has begun removing spent fuel from its 5-megawatt nuclear research reactor even though international monitors were not present. The United States and the IAEA had insisted that inspectors be present for any such action because spent fuel can potentially be reprocessed for use in nuclear weapons.

June 13, 1994: North Korea announces its withdrawal from the IAEA. This is distinct from pulling out of the NPT—North Korea is still required to undergo IAEA inspections as part of its NPT obligations. The IAEA contends that North Korea’s safeguards agreement remains in force. However, North Korea no longer participates in IAEA functions as a member state.

June 15, 1994: Former U.S. President Jimmy Carter negotiates a deal with North Korea in which Pyongyang confirms its willingness to “freeze” its nuclear weapons program and resume high-level talks with the United States. Bilateral talks are expected to begin, provided that North Korea allows the IAEA safeguards to remain in place, does not refuel its 5-megawatt nuclear reactor, and does not reprocess any spent nuclear fuel.

July 9, 1994: North Korean President Kim Il Sung dies and is succeeded by his son, Kim Jong Il.

August 12, 1994: An “agreed statement” is signed that establishes a three-stage process for the elimination of North Korea’s nuclear weapons program. In return, the United States promises to move toward normalized economic and diplomatic relations and assures North Korea that it will provide assistance with the construction of proliferation-resistant LWRs to replace North Korea’s graphite-moderated reactors.

October 21, 1994: The United States and North Korea conclude four months of negotiations by adopting the “Agreed Framework” in Geneva. To resolve U.S. concerns about Pyongyang’s plutonium-producing reactors and the Yongbyon reprocessing facility, the agreement calls for North Korea to freeze and eventually eliminate its nuclear facilities, a process that will require dismantling three nuclear reactors, two of which are still under construction. North Korea also allows the IAEA to verify compliance through “special inspections,” and it agrees to allow 8,000 spent nuclear reactor fuel elements to be removed to a third country.

In exchange, Pyongyang will receive two LWRs and annual shipments of heavy fuel oil during construction of the reactors. The LWRs will be financed and constructed through the Korean Peninsula Energy Development Organization (KEDO), a multinational consortium.

Calling for movement toward full normalization of political and economic relations, the accord also serves as a jumping-off point for U.S.-North Korean dialogue on Pyongyang’s development and export of ballistic missiles, as well as other issues of bilateral concern.

November 28, 1994: The IAEA announces that it had confirmed that construction has been halted at North Korea’s Nyongbyon and Taochon nuclear facilities and that these facilities are not operational.

1995

March 9, 1995:KEDO is formed in New York with the United States, South Korea, and Japan as the organization’s original members.

1996

January 1996: North Korea agrees in principle to a meeting on missile proliferation issues, which had been requested in a letter by Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs Thomas Hubbard. However, Pyongyang contends that the United States would have to ease economic sanctions before it could agree on a date and venue for the talks.

In testimony before a House International Relations subcommittee on March 19, Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs Winston Lord says that Washington is willing to ease economic sanctions if progress is made on the missile export issue.

April 21-22, 1996: The United States and North Korea meet in Berlin for their first round of bilateral missile talks. The United States reportedly suggests that North Korea should adhere to the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR), a voluntary international agreement aimed at controlling sales of ballistic missile systems, components, and technology. North Korea allegedly demands that the United States provide compensation for lost missile-related revenue.

May 24, 1996: The United States imposes sanctions on North Korea and Iran for missile technology-related transfers. The sanctions prohibit any imports or exports to sanctioned firms and to those sectors of the North Korean economy that are considered missile-related. The pre-existing general ban on trade with both countries makes the sanctions largely symbolic.*

October 16, 1996: After detecting North Korean preparations for a test of its medium-range Nodong missile, the United States deploys a reconnaissance ship and aircraft to Japan. Following several meetings in New York between U.S. and North Korean diplomats, the State Department confirms on November 8 that the missile test has been canceled.

1997  ......  

 

   et cetera.......  et cetera......  up to 2017    

  https://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/dprkchron

[Thaidream]

NKorea has been 'playing' the World for decades.  However, with the support of China and Russia-it is still possible to negotiate an acceptable end but NKorea must give up its nuclear arsenal and put it in the hands of the Chinese or Russia and end any effort to establish an intercontinental ballistic missile system. Without inspections- any agreement is worthless.

Ball is in NK's court-  let's hope they make the right choice.

[Catoni]

1 hour ago, Chip Allen said:

There will be no war. Trump changes his mind more often than a kitten. The Kim family blusters and bloviates but seems only able to kill their own people.

      Little Pillsbury Dough Boy Kim even likes to murder members of his own family and even a girlfriend or two...  (uncle, brother,  et al. ) 

[baboon]

Catoni: Have a look out out for Mike Chinoy's book 'Meltdown' for a more comprehensive look at the issues and the context behind them. It's an interesting read...

[owl sees all]

2 hours ago, Thaidream said:

I have always found that British Forces have always displayed a high level of professionalism and expertise.  If the US was attacked- I would hope the UK would assist.

Belgrano. Leaves a bad taste for UKs.

[Catoni]

5 minutes ago, Thaidream said:

NKorea has been 'playing' the World for decades.  However, with the support of China and Russia-it is still possible to negotiate an acceptable end but NKorea must give up its nuclear arsenal and put it in the hands of the Chinese or Russia and end any effort to establish an intercontinental ballistic missile system. Without inspections- any agreement is worthless.

Ball is in NK's court-  let's hope they make the right choice.

   North Korea could easily dismantle its nuclear weapon stockpile and eliminate its nuclear weapons grade material with the assistance, and under the guidance of the International Atomic Energy Association.... but North Korea already broken promise after promise with the IAEA and refused access to facilities for inspection. 

[midas]

Will Trump react to this ?

 

 

North Korea May Fire Short-Range Rockets Next Week, Daily Says

 

Quote

 

North Korea is preparing to fire multiple short-range rockets around the opening of the Chinese Communist Party’s twice-a-decade congress on Oct. 18, a South Korean daily newspaper reported.

The South Korean and U.S. militaries have recently spotted about 30 Scud rockets being moved from Hwangju, south of the capital Pyongyang, to a missile maintenance facility in the western coastal city of Nampo, the Seoul-based Asia Business Daily said, citing an unidentified person.

 

 

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-10-11/north-korea-may-fire-dozens-of-missiles-to-mark-china-s-congress

[Thaidream]

I doubt Trump will respond- except verbally- to NK firing a short range missile unless it comes very close to an inhabited area- in SKorea, Japan or other.  If Kim wants to waste his missile arsenal- let him do it.

[Catoni]

15 minutes ago, baboon said:

Catoni: Have a look out out for Mike Chinoy's book 'Meltdown' for a more comprehensive look at the issues and the context behind them. It's an interesting read...

 I see that Mike Chinoy says that " With North Korea, you are dealing with a regime that let nearly 2,000,000 of its own people starve to death in the late 1990's..."    

-    30 minutes into the video...  

 YouTube video title:  Meltdown: The Inside Story of the North Korean Nuclear Crisis (Mike Chinoy)

[Thaidream]

I met Mike Chinoy once upon a time. Fascinating man with a great perspective of all things Asia- fluent Mandarin speaker. He has made trips to NKorea. 

[oldlakey]

33 minutes ago, owl sees all said:

Belgrano. Leaves a bad taste for UKs.

A political decision, and one not to be proud of

[baboon]

34 minutes ago, Catoni said:

 I see that Mike Chinoy says that " With North Korea, you are dealing with a regime that let nearly 2,000,000 of its own people starve to death in the late 1990's..."    

-    30 minutes into the video...  

 YouTube video title:  Meltdown: The Inside Story of the North Korean Nuclear Crisis (Mike Chinoy)

It's a good video, alright. As said, check out the book if you can.

[SheungWan]

1 hour ago, Catoni said:

Your Unfortunately wrong...  I don't know why you would trust murderous dictator Kim Jong-un who executes members of his own family with anti-aircraft gun... and has his own girlfriend shot... over the highly respected International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

    Do you like totalitarian one party dicatorship prison countries  ? ?  

    Or is it just simple admiration for Kim Jong-un ? ?

Often one finds that the person concerned is some retired Stalinist CP hack still hankering after the old Tankie days of the Soviet Union.Either that or a younger Wannabe.

[Grouse]

59 minutes ago, owl sees all said:

Belgrano. Leaves a bad taste for UKs.

Nonsense! You think war is a game that should be played fairly? Not cricket eh?

 

 

Note the skull and cross bones as demanded by tradition (totenkopf in German)

 

When the British provide a warning, they mean it!

[baboon]

18 minutes ago, SheungWan said:

Often one finds that the person concerned is some retired Stalinist CP hack still hankering after the old Tankie days of the Soviet Union.Either that or a younger Wannabe.

Good one. Far more creative than the usual 'barstool' taunts one usually reads on Thaivisa...

[owl sees all]

44 minutes ago, Grouse said:

Nonsense! You think war is a game that should be played fairly? Not cricket eh?

Cricket has rules same as war!

[oldlakey]

1 hour ago, Grouse said:

Nonsense! You think war is a game that should be played fairly? Not cricket eh?

 

 

Note the skull and cross bones as demanded by tradition (totenkopf in German)

 

When the British provide a warning, they mean it!

The Belgrano was never capable of being a threat it should have been in the knackers yard years before

It could be tracked from miles away by a modern nuclear powered submarine

It had put about and was returning back to Argentina

Hence the decision to sink it was political and not military

As an Englishman not one of our proudest moments

The outcome of the war was not in doubt

The loss of life was totally unnecessary and achieved nothing 

[Grouse]

8 minutes ago, oldlakey said:

The Belgrano was never capable of being a threat it should have been in the knackers yard years before

It could be tracked from miles away by a modern nuclear powered submarine

It had put about and was returning back to Argentina

Hence the decision to sink it was political and not military

As an Englishman not one of our proudest moments

The outcome of the war was not in doubt

The loss of life was totally unnecessary and achieved nothing 

I take your point but the outcome was very much in doubt....

 

Heart of Oak is always worth hearing! I had to stand up!

 

Edited October 11, 2017 by Grouse

[oldlakey]

4 minutes ago, Grouse said:

I take your point but the outcome was very much in doubt....

Not really

Men against boys

Volunteers against conscripts

[Grouse]

Just now, oldlakey said:

Not really

Men against boys

Volunteers against conscripts

Well, we'll just have to agree to differ. I am not going to divulge my sources but it was as I say.

 

"Just Rejoice"....

[owl sees all]

1 minute ago, oldlakey said:

Not really

Men against boys

Volunteers against conscripts

Also worth remembering that reporting back to the UK was severely restricted. They just thought they would get away with it.

[oldlakey]

4 minutes ago, Grouse said:

Well, we'll just have to agree to differ. I am not going to divulge my sources but it was as I say.

 

"Just Rejoice"....

Thanks for keeping stum on that Grouse, because you would obviously have to kill me if you divulged your sources

 

[oldlakey]

22 minutes ago, Grouse said:

I take your point but the outcome was very much in doubt....

 

Heart of Oak is always worth hearing! I had to stand up!

 

As for your EDIT I will deal with that now

No blame can be attached to the Royal Navy in my view

Scumbag Thatcher owns it all

The good old cannon fodder did their bit to get her re-elected, not least the Welsh Guards

[Thongkorn]

On 10/9/2017 at 4:39 AM, anto said:

Yes Britain ,The US lap dog .

No wise head on a young inpetulant Nation.  

[Thongkorn]

On 10/9/2017 at 2:27 PM, hyku1147 said:

The UK should make mandatory military service a condition for immigration.

How many do you think would fight for their adopted country, Look at those who are born in Britain , they support their parents home country, Like Cricket football and the rest.That says it all. Dont want to integrate , just accept free money , handouts and protection.

[Caps]

4 hours ago, oldlakey said:

Not really

Men against boys

Volunteers against conscripts

Tough...they should have stayed in Argentina then

[SheungWan]

7 hours ago, Thongkorn said:

How many do you think would fight for their adopted country, Look at those who are born in Britain , they support their parents home country, Like Cricket football and the rest.That says it all. Dont want to integrate , just accept free money , handouts and protection.

That's a nice broad brush you have got there.

Edited October 11, 2017 by SheungWan

[oldlakey]

6 hours ago, Caps said:

Tough...they should have stayed in Argentina then

I suspect they would agree wholeheartedly with you