Skip to comments.
*****N. KOREA HIDING 3 NUKES IN UNDERGROUND BUNKERS*****
Geostrategy Direct.com ^
| April 2, 2002
Posted on 03/27/2002 7:49:52 AM PST by codebreaker
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-36 next last
Somewhere, Bill Clinton is ducking for cover.
To: codebreaker
I thought Bill Clinton worked out a deal with his very good friends in North Korea to halt nuclear development in exchange for US taxpayer money? /bs
To: Oldeconomybuyer
This also explains why gas has been shooting up lately, isn't a large percentage of the world's oil under Saudi control?
To: codebreaker
Secret agenda for Arab summit is funding for the Palentinian war This is wrong, PA got shunned at the summit as usual.
4
posted on
03/27/2002 7:54:45 AM PST
by
smith288
To: codebreaker
The man has no shame, the only thing he's use to ducking is the truth.
To: smith288
This whole things smells of a propoganda campaign to win the political support for an open-ended war in the Middle East. Where are these intelligence leaks coming from if not the bombers at the Pentagon?
6
posted on
03/27/2002 7:58:17 AM PST
by
JohnGalt
To: codebreaker
I believe that Russian output just reached parity with the entire Mid-East. They're not part of OPEC and have been flooding the market the past few months. If they weren't doing that, the price would be skyrocketing far higher than it is now.
To: codebreaker
They do. Canadians have a huge amount north of Edmonton and the Venezuelans have vast quantities.
To: HELLRAISER II
This will be Clintoons legacy bringing the world back to the brink of extinction by giving the Chinese sub nukes able to hit L.A., San Francisco, Seattle and San Diego.
We will find out in due time what N. Korea got out of the deal.
To: Tree of Liberty
Thank goodness we can do ANWAR drilling, properly done that could last us for 200 years.
To: codebreaker
I'm hoping the NK is on notice that if those bunkers are opened they'll be immediately tomahawked.
Comment #12 Removed by Moderator
To: codebreaker
Based on public info (which is all I have access to), their subs can barely make it out of port and back. They won't be a primary threat for several years yet. Their ICBM's on the other hand...
To: matamoros
Religion of peace and all that stuff.
To: Tree of Liberty
But stategically aren't the subs toughest to defend?
To: codebreaker
Not only should we start drilling ANWAR, but also the coasts, and especially the Gulf of Mexico which is one of, if not the most voluminious reserves on earth.
To: Tree of Liberty
They won't be a primary threat for several years yet.The nukes are also untested.
To: codebreaker
The man has inflicted untold damage against us & he has put the whole world at jepardy because of his arrogance & greed.
To: codebreaker
Subs, if functional, are the most effective leg of the nuclear triad (bombers, subs, land-based missiles). However, they need to be fairly close to the enemies shores since missiles aboard subs are for intermediate range.
Besides not being able to travel very far, which as mentioned, is necessary for use as a nuclear launch platform, Chinese subs (even their deisels and those purchased from Russia) are very noisey. That's a BIG no-no when quiet's the name of the game.
To: Semper Paratus
If that's the case, then even if lauchned, they'd probably be "just" dirty bombs. It's a threat, but not on the scale of a fusion bomb. It'd also be interesting to know if they use solid or liquid fuel for the missile's propellent (liquid fuel being far more dangerous to use).
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-36 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson