North Korea's Secret Biochemical Arsenal 321
mattnyc99 writes "Popular Mechanics has an in-depth report on North Korea's biological and chemical weapons stock, which has been developed in secret and has gone largely unnoticed amidst the country's nuke threat. From the article: 'North Korea's Chemical and Bioweapons (CBW) program appears to be modeled on that of the former Soviet Union, which covertly constructed a massive biological weapons infrastructure within the shell of a civilian research organization called Biopreparat. Inside Biopreparat, the Soviets developed deadly agents that included weaponized forms of anthrax and pneumonic plague. Intelligence reports from the United States and South Korea list anthrax, smallpox, pneumonic plague, cholera and botulism toxins as leading components of North Korea's bioweapons projects.' "
Hans Brix to the rescue (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Hans Brix to the rescue (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Hans Brix to the rescue (Score:4, Insightful)
A joke which is far from new: (Score:2)
We shall probably issue a Joint Memorandum suggesting a mild disapproval of you!"
-- Punch magazine, in 1935, on the ineffectual response of Britain and France to the Abyssinian crisis The cartoon [ebayimg.com], found on an ebay auction
Re:Hans Blix to the rescue (Score:5, Insightful)
North Korea is also prepping a new nuke test... (Score:3, Interesting)
What do you need bio for? (Score:2)
Re:What do you need bio for? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:What do you need bio for? (Score:5, Funny)
George Bush: "We know they've got weapons of mass destruction"
Public: "How do you know?"
George: "Uhh... we looked at the reciept..."
Re: (Score:2)
You know we armed Iraq. I wondered about that too, you know. During the Persian Gulf war, those intelligence reports would come out:
"Iraq: incredible weapons - incredible weapons."
"How do you know that?"
"Uh, well
Re: (Score:2)
The popular can do whatever they want!
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Holy crap, that is so wrong...
You're right, I probably should have worded it better. Still funny though. But on a serious note, if NK does collapse, and refugees pour into China who are possibly carrying infectious diseases, you can't deny that the world's economy would take a hit. I mean let's face it, companies are setting up manufacturing plants in China because of the labor force being so cheap (compared to the US, UK, EU, etc.). This whole thing is like firing a gun just to get rid of a bullet, but it's aimed at your head. Su
Different uses. (Score:3, Insightful)
Chemical - Used to restrict the enemy's access to terrain which forces him to attack along routes you've selected or require him to attack wearing protective suits. Chemicals can also be used to "soften" a target before your own troops attack.
Nuclear - Big boom. Lots of damage.
So, I can see them working on chemical weapons and nukes. But biological weapons make no sense for them. Particularly when the "enemy" is onl
Re:Different uses. (Score:5, Insightful)
But those are the ones protecting you. (Score:3, Insightful)
Vaccinate the army, and only the army. (Score:3, Insightful)
In fact, if you're a country looking to get rid of some "surplus" population, not to mention keep your military's grip firm on the populace, a carefully engineered outbreak wouldn't be a bad way of doing it. You vaccinate the folks you want to keep around, and let God sort out the rest.
Of course, North Korea's government seems to do just fine using famine as i
Re: (Score:2)
Boy, are you clueless. First, nearly all nations who have an army already have Bio and Chemical units. Why? Because they are low cost and trivial to do. In fact, Biological warfare has been done forever. Smallpox has been very useful.
But Biological is even easier then the others. First, you can create virus that target a specific genome. If you are China and decide to target America, you simply go after white and
Far fewer. (Score:2)
Biological weapons can (usually) be transmitted from person to person. Infect 1 person and he can infect 1,000 others. The disease breeds inside the victim.
Radiation is only a threat to those handling the materials.
Chemicals are a bigger threat than radiation, but less than biological. And chemical spills are usually easy to see or the effects are noticed quickly. Chemical weapons are very similar to the pesticides t
Re: (Score:2)
On the contrary, if humanity had a full on nuclear war right now it would survive. Sure, we'd lose three or four billion, but we'd still have two or three, and the southern hemisphere would be largely fine. The northern would be okay to repopulate in not too long, as the hotspots would be contained.
But a few grams of the correct germ, with initial placement for it's full impact? 12 monkeys (or The Stand, or 28 Days Later &c &c ) would look like happy days.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
ant.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Now try spreading 2lbs. of botulin toxin across the entire planet.
Hmmm. You seem to have come up with a new concept: homeopathic bioweapons. Congratulations!
MartTo quote from B5 (Score:5, Insightful)
- Londo Mollari [wikipedia.org]
Great, one more country has one more way of killing several large number of people in one go.
One would think that sooner or later we'd stop this crap.
Sorry, just a little frustrated with the fact that every time I have looked at news the past week, there is killing and murder and unrest everywhere. Bah.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
> - Londo Mollari
Sooner or later we'll stop this crap? Sorry, we don't get to decide. I'll see your Londo and raise you a Kosh:
"The avalanche has already started. It is too late for the pebbles to vote."
Re: (Score:2)
Those are truly scary. Can you imagine an outbreak of a strain of smallpox that cannot be controlled?
And chemical weapons combined with traditional weapons can wreak more havoc than, say, gunpowder alone.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
That does sound nasty, where exactly are they sticking those IUDS ?
Re: (Score:2)
Popular Mechanics? (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Popular Mechanics? (Score:5, Informative)
Another nice aspect of globalsecurity and the Federation of American Scientists, is that both maintain rather extensive databases of information on weapon systems. For example, if after reading the article, I want to know how far a chemical weapon-equipped Scud could deliver it's payload, I can look that up [globalsecurity.org], too.
Re: (Score:2)
I agree that if one thought this was actually news, then hearing it from Popular Mechanics might seem a little odd. But this is hardly news. Of course NK has been been doing this stuff for decades. And just like every major intel agency on the planet knew that Saddam was (at various times, in various amounts) hiding stuff, they all know that NK has stuff. Unlike Saddam, NK hasn't yet trotted it out and used it on an ethnic minority at the
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Um, yeah... except that we aren't living in cruel Stalinist dictatorship that's starving its people, running forced labor camps to control population, and threateningly launching missles at and over neighboring countries. The "Dear Leader" is an absolute loon in charge of
Evil Dictator has WMD! (maybe...) (Score:5, Funny)
This gets so old (Score:2)
Ob. Team America (Score:2)
"You have any idea how fucking buzy I am?"
mmm hear those drums? (Score:2)
What about my flying car? (Score:5, Insightful)
By the way Popular Mechnaics, where is my flying car or personal submarine?
And? (Score:2)
1. Now that today's bad guy is doing it how is it different than say (insert former bad-country-now-fighting-the-war-on-terrr here) doing it?
2. What special inroad does popular mechanics have in NORTH korea? Most objective analysts would have a hard time verifying it and I'd like to hear it from them.
3. Does anyone recall the long and sordid history of planted stories, media contacts and testimony in the U.S. in o
NK's WMD PR Dept. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Damn, the North Korean secret minister for secret affairs must be having a pretty bad day.
Popular Mechanics and Iraq (Score:2, Insightful)
i actually like the idea (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I was thinking more of Bush or the North Korean dictator of the day or any other dumbasses... it's a shame millions will suffer until one of them die or chage place with another dumbass...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
...other life forms don't really give a shit to Ebola, AIDS or other dumb monkey weapons...
I may be wrong, but weren't both AIDS and Ebola contracted from monkeys?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Oddly enough, I would be in no way surprised to learn that you got your +5 Insightful for speculating favorably on humanity self-exterminating from people who go apoplectic over Christians who believe in and look forward to the second coming.
Compared to, say, the US ... (Score:5, Insightful)
The simple fact is that all countries see these kinds of weapons as not only useful deterrents, but necessary deterrents. Consider, for example, how things would have played out differently if Iraq had possessed the nuclear ( or newkilla weapons as Dubya and half of the US pronounce it ), chemical and biological weapons that the US was claiming they had. The would have been no invasion, or if there had, there would have been very, very serious consequences, not only for US and coalition-of-the-killing troups, but for US citizens as well.
This is what proliferation is all about. This is why the US is so hypocritical when it demands that all others renounce WOMD, terrorism and such. They are the biggest perpetrators, and force everyone else's hand. Whether you agree with the politics of the other states involved or not ( and I'm certainly no fan of North Korea ), you have to look at it from their point of view. Having a US armed to the teeth with WOMD, and being the biggest terrorist around, it makes good sense to get some serious arsenal of your own. What's good for the goose
Re:Compared to, say, the US ... (Score:4, Insightful)
It's stored and contained by a relatively responsible and sane government with no intention of using it. Iraq's stockpile of WMDs was not alleged - it was filmed and documented by United Nations weapons inspectors and it was actively used against Iran and the Kurds. North Korea's stockpile isn't alleged either - they've admitted on numerous occassions that they have weaponized Uranium and have working nuclear weapons. Furthermore, they've threatened to actually use those weapons against those they perceive as conspiring against them (ie "sea of fire...").
In your rush to condemn the United States and its government, you seem to have lost track of the fact that Iraq murdered hundreds of thousands of its own citizens and attacked its neighbors, and North Korea is threatening nearby democracies with nuclear destruction while its citizens starve en masse in an Orwellian police state. The world is not black and white as we would like, and it's time for people who delude themselves into believing it is to grow up.
Chicken Shit (Score:2, Insightful)
The uber responsible goverment of USA sell that chemical weapons to Saddam to take down Islamic Iran Regime in 1980's. That chemical weapons used against Iran and Kurds sell by Rumsfield himself...
There was no chemical weapon production plant in Iraq, no one found it. If they found it where is the evidence ?
USA goverment broke down the IRAQ goverment, if you haven't got instant replacement, you cannot change goverment like this. Entire country will collapsed...
Current statu
Re: (Score:2)
Of? Iraq's killing of hundreds of thousands of its own citizens? Well, I can't very well drop all the corpses on your desk, but would you like pictures of the bodies laying in the streets and in mass graves? Careful - seeing dead children is a little startling.
"There was no chemical weapon production plant in Iraq, no one found it. If they found it where is the evidence ?"
Ok, they had no chemical weapons production - the chemical weapons they used in Iran and in northern I
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
Unfortunately a lot of Americans still believe this. You need to turn off Fox news and get your information from elsewhere. The UN categorically stated, time and again, that they found no evidence of any WMD program in Iraq. This is why Dubya had to act unilaterally and go directly against the wishes of the UN ( and the security council, no less ) in invading Iraq.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
So, what's the plan? Do we hold off on diplomatically confronting them until North Korea has a nuclear weapo
Re:Compared to, say, the US ... (Score:4, Insightful)
They are seeking weapons as deterrence. As for the 'Orwellian police state', have a look at the US. Sure, North Korea is not innocent in this respect, but the scale of development of the US police state dwarfs North Korea incredibly. You need to get some context into your analysis.
And you need to get some into yours. The scale of development of the "US police state" is large, sure - because the US has a large population and a huge economy and ready access to high technology. The scope of the "US police state", however, in terms of the degree to which it actually affects the life of the average American citizen, simply pales in comparison to that of North Korea. This comparison is so ridiculous as to almost not bear scrutiny. For all the discussion and concern raised in the Slashosphere and elsewhere, the "US police state" is at most a minor issue or annoyance to the vast majority of the American people, whereas the North Korean government not only is far more intrusive and oppressive, but it's willing to fund that totalitarian regime even at the expense letting its own people freeze and starve to death, all for the glory of the Exalted Leader. Look, I'm about a libertarian a guy as you're likely to find on Slashdot, and as such I have plenty of criticisms of the US government, but to seriously compare it to North Korea is simply preposterous. [Waits patiently for the minus points...]
Re: (Score:2)
The Kurds would tend to disagree.
Nuke The Motherfuckers into Oblivion (Score:4, Funny)
It will be a short and simple war, unlike Iraq. We won't send a single person into combat. But 100-200 nuclear MIRVs will be sent on the first strike.
The longer we wait the more dangerous NK becomes. They have probably already moved CBW to U.S. and European cities.
Time to strike.
Re: (Score:2)
It's China next then ?
Re: (Score:2)
Sure there is. Convince S. Korea to open their borders and let the N. Korean troops enter. Chances are, after seeing how good the South had it for the past 50 years, the N. Korean people will force Kim Jong Il to assume his rightful place in the world - in front of a firing squad.
-b.
What do we get from NK ? (Score:2, Insightful)
What a lovely country. (Score:5, Informative)
The hidden gulag: Reports leak out of atrocities at North Korean labor camps [signonsandiego.com]
Auschwitz Under Our Noses [washingtonpost.com]
A WELL-FOUNDED FEAR: PUNISHMENT AND LABOR CAMPS IN NORTH KOREA [hrw.org]
Death and terror in North Korea's gulags [msn.com]
Comparative Analysis of Concentration Camps in Nazi Germany, the Former Soviet Union and North Korea [chosunjournal.com]
An Auschwitz in Korea [boston.com]
It's baffling to me why a country that has consistently and fairly been compared with Nazi Germany, to the point of concentration camps and illegal medical experimentation, has been allowed to exist for this long. Drudge reported this morning that they're prepping another nuke test, and it's a well-known fact that they've been developing chem and bio weapons for years. A new Hitler has risen, and we are so busy looking elsewhere that we either haven't noticed or don't care.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Actually worse than Hitler. Hitler actually brought prosperity to the non-Jewish, non-dissident, non-... part of Germany before WW II. All Kim Jong Il has done is supervise the slow starvation of his country. I bet that if North Korean troops saw what was south of the border, he'd have a mutiny on his hands within a month.
-b.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Because they have an enormous army and loads of missiles aimed at one of the world's densest population areas?
Just about every regime in existence thinks NK is a scar on the face of the world but no one is able to do anything about it.
Re:Hmmmm... Where's Bush on All This? (Score:5, Insightful)
Although, China has been making moves to distance themselves from N.K. recently. but until they do, they'll be off limits. Both of my grandfathers fought in the last Korean war, and as one of them put it "Frequently, we'd run out of machine gun bullets before they ran out of troops to throw at us"
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Where else can China sell oil at above market rates with no competition from anyone else? The two countries trade, but when it comes down to it, China does not like North Korea much and has a lot of troops on the border. However, any military action so close to China would make them very paranoid and if handled the wrong way would get China involved.
Many (not including the poster above) still haven't learned the blatantly obvious message from Vi
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Back to your comment:
Funny... a bioweapons program in N. Korea? With nukes and everything? Real, tangible weapons of mass destruction? With a prosperous true democracy only minutes away? Where's the sabre-rattling? Why hasn't Colin Powell been dispatched to the UN? How come Condi's not talking about mushroom clouds?
Well, if Bush hadn't r
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Well, if Bush hadn't received so much shit for the last war, he might be a bit more willing to go at it again. I'm sure the last thing the administration wants to give you guys another reason to protest for impeachment.
Wait, wait, wait.... You're blaming the left wing (and centrists, too, for that matter) for trying to hold Bush accountable for all of the lying and whatnot? Perhaps if his administration hadn't done it with Iraq, he wouldn't be blamed for it, and he'd be more willing to go after North K
Re:Hmmmm... Where's Bush on All This? (Score:4, Insightful)
Although unfortunately with the situation in N. Korea there is the added problem that S. Korea is basically a hostage (well within missle range), and Seoul with its ten million or so citizens will likely face annihilation should hostilities begin in the region.
Also of note, the National Defense Authorization Act [thinkprogress.org] passed in October 2006 required Bush to appoint a Policy Coordinator to deal directly with N.K. issues within 60 days, that date has come and gone and the post remains unfilled.
Re:Hmmmm... Where's Bush on All This? (Score:5, Insightful)
Seoul is within *artillery* range of NK and NK has the capacity to bombard it with hundreds of thousands of rounds of artillery *per hour* until that capacity is destroyed. On the first day of fighting, there would probably be more than a million SK casualties. And these would be *first-world citizen* casualties, not third-world casualties taht nobody cares about. This is why there has not been and will not be an invasion of NK. The costs would be too high, even if NK didn't have nukes or bio-chems.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Blame the intelligence services for all of the l
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
So you're drinking the kool-aid and blaming the "intelligence failures" on the intelligence services? Not the administration, who attempted to discredit Valerie Plame's husband and his report that there was nothing to the Nigerian yellowcake story by outing her as a spy? And failed to listen to Hans Blix, who "accused the U.S. and British governments of dramatising the threat of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, in order to strengthen the case for the 2003 war against the regime of Saddam Hussein." (fr
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Do you seriously believe that a president should make a decision of that gravity on the basis of a single report and a one-liner from a career politician who obviously knows on which side his bread is buttered?
Re: (Score:2)
As for foreign services talking about WMDs, do you have a quote? All I remember from every international news source (quoting both elected and intelligence official
Re: (Score:2)
Frontline [pbs.org] had a pretty good documentary on this the other night. While it was actually a bit slated to left, it explained where much of the intel came from. Here [2020vision.org] is another example:
Re:Hmmmm... Where's Bush on All This? (Score:5, Insightful)
I must have missed the memo. When did Saddam Hussein announce the successful test of a nuclear bomb, and when did seismographs worldwide confirm this?
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Also please cite where sadam hussein killed 1.5 million innocent people. I havent read any sources that claim anywhere above a few hundred thousand (and even those numbers I would consider high, from what Ive read about him).
How does this shit get modded up? OF COURSE YOU CAN! There was no
Re: (Score:2)
Now read this article Putin says Iraq planned US attack [bbc.co.uk], or any of the many others that say the same thing, and tell me again how Bush lied and there was no evidence for the war.
You can't say Bush is to blame for doing when supposedly warned about 9-11 and then claim he was wrong for doing somet
Re: (Score:2)
What you're doing, ArcherB, is kinda like Monday-night quarterbacking. You're digging for reasons to take Saddam out ex post facto, when there are several other countries who deserve no less of a respite from the despots in power. Why did we choose Iraq? Let's do a simple rundown of the facts:
The United States invaded a sovereign nation on shaky evidence of wrongdoing, when there were options available to the international community. Also, this supposed wrongdoing was
Re: (Score:2)
Hundreds of millions of dollars worth of corruption (from many different companies and countries, including at least one US oil company), replaced by a billion dollar program that would "pay for Iraqi's reconstruction" with such wonderful things as KBR spending $75 million of our taxes failing to build a pipeline its own consultants said could not be built. And now we have US judges basically green-lighting rampant fraud against Americans by claiming that
Re: (Score:2)
This has been going on for longer than he has been President so I consider that remark irrevelevent. He also did talk about rogue states when he first came to office.
Re: (Score:2)
Why exactly has this nutjob NOT been assasinated yet? If not by the US, then how about by one of the other countries that hate them, such as South Korea, China or Japan? I'm sure the rest of the world would be willing to look the other way. A nice double-tap to the head and
Re: (Score:2)
Becuase then you may get a worse nutjob with full support of a greiving nation looking for vengance. It's also the sort of idiocy that started WWI and other things.
Individuals do not count as much as hero worshippers think - as an example the fighting in Iraq has had nothing to do with Saddam since he hid in a hole in the ground a long time ago.
Re: (Score:2)
Until you understand this, you have no business saying anything at all about any policy towards North Korea.
Re: (Score:2)
You speak of South Korea... you realize, should war break out there, the US doesn't have any way of defending South Korea from the use of these weapons?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
(Whisper it: he's dead. Has been for years. But they need a bogeyman, an Immanuel Goldstein, and he's the man in the frame)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Just our luck that Bush's dad "had it ou
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Sure... (Score:5, Insightful)
You'd have a point, except it is China, Japan and S. Korea making the claims. Are they all lying too?
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The US does not have these weapons (Score:2)
One may argue that the various psychopathic presidents that we have had then have reactivated the biowarfare programs secretly. But I don't believe that this is so. Millions of people in the military and private defense industries don't like bioweapons and wouldn't keep secret programs operating secretly. It has been alleged but never proven that AIDS wa
Re: (Score:2)
It'd be a long, wet drive home.....flying or maybe a nice cruise sounds more appealing.