The Command Post
Global Recon
September 12, 2004
North Korea "Blast" Updates [Updated]

[Updates to the two posts below]

So, what went on in North Korea? Was it a nuclear test, an industrial accident or something more mundane?

The blast supposedly occurred on Thursday, September 9, a date which marks the anniversary of North Korea.

Sean Hackberth was able to dig up a few seismographs, all of which show something unusual happening on 9/9 at about 9:00am (PST).

While agencies in North Korea are denying that any explosion that occurred was nuclear in origins, there are still no explanations for the unusual activity or the fact that many witnesses reported seeing a "strange" or "mushroom" cloud, which raises many questions, especially when you consider that [t]he explosion appeared to be stronger than an April 22 blast that killed more than 150 people and wounded about 1,300 others in Ryongchon near the western tip of North Korea's border with China.

While many are claiming there was no nuclear explosion, the New York Times reports it this way:

President Bush and his top advisers have received intelligence reports in recent days describing a confusing series of actions by North Korea that some experts believe could indicate the country is preparing to conduct its first test explosion of a nuclear weapon, according to senior officials with access to the intelligence.

[...]

One official with access to the intelligence called it "a series of indicators of increased activity that we believe would be associated with a test," saying that the "likelihood" of a North Korean test had risen significantly in just the past four weeks....The activities included the movement of materials around several suspected test sites, including one near a location where intelligence agencies reported last year that conventional explosives were being tested that could compress a plutonium core and set off a nuclear blast. But officials have not seen the classic indicators of preparations at a test site, in

Or have they?

However, here we have someone who doesn't buy the nuclear test theory, citing seismic data that is contrary to reports. He also mentions that BBC is reporting that it may have just been a forest fire that people were witnessing.

This person compares the data on the seismographs to earthquakes and comes up with nuclear test.

We'll keep updating on this one until (if) there is some sort of conclusion.

[some links via Allah Pundit]

More here and here.

UPDATE:

Well, now we're getting to the bottom of this. It's all part of the October Surprise!

Posted by Michele at September 12, 2004 06:38 AM | TrackBack
Comments

Posted by: M. Simon [TypeKey Profile Page] at September 12, 2004 08:53 AM

If it's an underground nuke, we'll know within no more than 20-30 minutes.

If it's an atmospheric test, figure 10-15 at the outside.

Within 24-36 hours of the latter, we'll know the precise nature of the bomb materials.

Posted by: Don [TypeKey Profile Page] at September 12, 2004 11:12 AM

Maybe the Norks, while smoking, were trying to fill another ballistic missle with super secret, super-boomie fuel like back in April 2003...

Explosion hit North Korea missile test site: report
SEOUL (AFP) Apr 21, 2003
http://www.spacedaily.com/2003/030421022435.0gtnrgax.html

Posted by: Max Darkside [TypeKey Profile Page] at September 12, 2004 02:51 PM

a mushroom cloud ensued after the blast. forest fires do not make a mushroom cloud. the most plausible explanation atm is a chemical/industrial factory blowing up.

Posted by: DietCheese [TypeKey Profile Page] at September 12, 2004 04:28 PM

Atmospheric tests are detected by the US immediately.

The USAF has DSP (Defense Support Program) satellites which have IR sensors.

Not only can they detect nuclear detonations, but they can detect missile launches. That includes everything from ICBMs to SRBMs like Scuds.

Posted by: Mark [TypeKey Profile Page] at September 12, 2004 11:35 PM

N Korea says it blew up mountain!
The country's foreign minister, Paek Nam-sun, said the blast was in fact the deliberate demolition of a mountain as part of a huge, hydro-electric project.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/3650702.stm

What the hell would you use to blow up a mountain?

Posted by: bascule [TypeKey Profile Page] at September 13, 2004 05:50 AM

Post a comment

Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (Click here should you choose to sign out.)

As you post your comment, please mind our simple comment policy: we welcome all perspectives, but require that comments be both civil and respectful. We also ask that you avoid the extensive use of profanity, racist terms (neither of which we consider civil or respectful), and other boorish language.

We reserve the right to delete any comment, and to prohibit you from commenting on this site, if we feel you have broached this policy. As a courtesy, we will first send you an email noting a violation so you understand the boundaries. This will occur only once, however, and should we ban you from our comment forums we expect that ban to be permanent.

We also will frown upon those who suggest that we ban other individuals for voicing unpopular opinions, should those opinions be voiced in a civil and respectful manner. The point of our comment threads is to provide a forum for spirited though civil and respectful discourse … it is not to provide a forum in which everyone will agree with your point of view.

If you can live by these rules, welcome aboard. If not, then we’re sorry it didn’t work out, and thanks for visiting The Command Post.


Remember me?