Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
KIM JONG-UN has ordered North Korea’s nuclear arsenal to be readied for pre-emptive use at any time, in an expected escalation of military rhetoric following the UN Security Council’s adoption of tough new sanctions on Pyongyang.
The North’s nuclear warheads must be deployed “on standby so as to be fired at any moment”, Kim was quoted as saying by the North’s official KCNA news agency today.
He also warned that the situation on the divided Korean peninsula had become so dangerous that the North needed to shift its military strategy to one of “pre-emptive attack”.
Such bellicose rhetoric is almost routine for North Korea at times of elevated tensions.
While the North is known to have a small stockpile of nuclear warheads, experts are divided about its ability to mount them on a working missile delivery system.
Washington downplayed Kim’s threat as posturing.
“We have not seen North Korea test or demonstrate the ability to miniaturise a nuclear weapon and put it on an ICBM (intercontinental ballistic missile),” a US defence official told AFP.
Still, the official added, “our forces are ready to counter-eliminate strikes if necessary”.
‘Stern punishment’
In Seoul, President Park Geun-Hye promised South Korea would mete out “stern punishment” in the event of any North Korea provocation as she warned of a “fiercer” backlash than usual from Pyongyang over the latest UN sanctions.
According to KCNA, Kim made his comments while monitoring the test firing of a new, high-calibre multiple rocket launcher on Thursday, just hours after the UN Security Council unanimously adopted the US-drafted resolution penalising the North for its fourth nuclear test in January and long-range rocket launch last month.
South Korea’s defence ministry said the North had fired half a dozen rockets about 100-150 kilometres (60-90 miles) into the sea off its eastern coast on Thursday.
In a clear threat to the neighbouring South, Kim said the new rocket launcher should be “promptly deployed” along with other “recently developed” weaponry.
In the wake of the “gangster-like” UN resolution pushed by the United States and its South Korean ally, North Koreans are now “waiting for an order of combat to annihilate the enemy with their surging wrath”, he added.
The Security Council resolution adopted late on Wednesday laid out the toughest sanctions imposed on Pyongyang to date over its nuclear weapons programme and will, if implemented effectively, apply significant economic pressure on Kim’s regime.
It breaks new ground by sanctioning specific sectors key to the North Korean economy – such as mineral exports – and seeking to undermine the North’s use of, and access to, international transport systems.
‘Dangerous phase’
Kim said the resolution had opened a “very dangerous phase”, coming just days before the United States and South Korea kick off annual joint military drills that Pyongyang views as provocative rehearsals for invasion.
The exercises involving tens of thousands of troops are scheduled to begin next Monday.
The Security Council resolution ushered in the fifth set of UN sanctions to hit North Korea since it first tested an atomic device in 2006, and was the result of arduous negotiations between the US and China, Pyongyang’s sole major ally.
China had been reluctant to endorse tough sanctions out of concern that too much pressure would trigger the collapse of the pariah regime, creating chaos on its border.
The measures Beijing finally signed off on are extremely tough on paper, but experts have warned that some of the language is vague enough to allow varying levels of enforcement.
China’s commitment could depend on the outcome of formal talks that opened Friday between Seoul and Washington on the possible deployment of an advanced US missile defence system in South Korea.
The Thaad system fires anti-ballistic missiles to smash into enemy missiles either inside or outside the Earth’s atmosphere during their final flight phase.
Its deployment is strongly opposed by China and Russia, with Beijing saying it would undermine its own nuclear deterrent and has the potential to “destroy” relations with Seoul.
Unfortunately, this University is really dropping standards, the quality of new lecturing staff is very low, they seem to be hiring people who have qualified with PhDs but no experience. Incredible campus though!
@Joe Conlon: That’s not true the standard of lecturing is excellent. There are new PHD lecturers in most universities but that doesn’t mean they are poor in any way. It’s a fantastic place and it’s a shame to see former staff claiming money they were not supposed to get. That’s if the allegations prove true. The University under its new leadership has done the right thing in looking for a review. It’s a big place with many departments and many qualifications offered and all are of the highest calibre.
@Joe Conlon: That sounds like a very broad assessment and I doubt it’s true. Mind narrowing it down to the department you have experience with because it certainly isn’t true for mine.
@Catherine Sims: we will have to disagree on that, I suppose it does depend on discipline but there has been a significant drop in standards, education is a commodity now and is being reflected as such in this unit.
@Joe Conlon: It has the 2nd highest employability in the country after Trinity and is in the top 150 globally, I’m not sure what you’re using to measure this standard drop.
http://www.ul.ie/international/ul-ranks-highly-qs-global-employability-ranking
@Rochelle: perhaps Joe didn’t do well and wants to blame the lecturers ???
@Catherine Sims: Perhaps he didn’t even get in!
@Rochelle: My own experience, I studied there as an undergrad and got my master’s there back in the day and it was truly excellent, I decided to study further on a part time basis recently and simply found the people over the programme did not know their material at all. By the way, if you have the time read Ellen Hazelkorns books on rankings and that will make it clear on why these rankings that you just referenced mean nothing.
@Catherine Sims: I have done very well thank you, I even lectured there myself for 5 years but am now working in the private sector. However, with your negative response I suspect that it’s you that has ended up in a dead-end job?
@Chef, you don’t even have a qualify to get into University, once you are 23 you can apply for any course in any college that you wish, and if you have enough money, universities service the elites even better. Another individual with a chip on your shoulder I suspect?
@Joe Conlon: In which department? My objection is why you’re tarnishing an entire University for what seems to be an observation you’ve made in your own department.
@Catherine Sims: Catherine if the lecturing staff are confined primarily people with PHD’s and not enough people with experience would he have a point?
@Catherine Sims: if the above point is valid (which it is), why would you try and suggest a possible slander and ridicule to his character based of a journal comment and having no knowledge? Would that make you a petulant child? Asking for a friend
All universities are certainly guilty of a particular problem: making certain that people don’t get employed long enough to give permanency.
Now, there’s a few fair arguments on that: Lecturers fresh from PhD or within a few years from their research tend to be more up to date and permanence can facilitate complacency.
But there are certainly counterpoints on that too: PhDs are very specific and with a narrow focus, if you’re in a place and proving yourself for a decade then it’s hard to argue someone is complacent.
As with all jobs, minimum expectations should be met. During my time at UL I had only 2 lecturers I had a problem with – one a complete waster (anyone who studied to be a tech teacher in UL will know EXACTLY who this is) and the other someone I just fundementally disagreed with but can recognise that they were certainly fit for the job.
The same goes for the TA’s who were IMO nothing less than excellent.
As for excessive expenses – I would be surprised if questions shouldn’t be asked of a lot of universities on that.
What gets me about things like that are that in a static way, it should be pretty obvious where there should be questions asked. Things aren’t static of course – blips in funding and workload occur. But over a period of years it should be pretty reasonable to look at ratios and be readily able to explain any deviation from what you would expect to be a pretty reasonable cycle.
And the whistle blowers who exposed the financial malpractice within UL have been treated disgracefully ever since. Smear campaigns have been carried out by certain individuals.
@Colm O’Sullivan: it wouldnt be Ireland if it were any different
Great University and great Campus.
Unfortunately he mentioned ‘stakeholders’ – that’s when I glaze over.
@eastsmer #IRExit: You do know that isn’t the same thing as “stockholders”?
Everyone working and attanding and studying at UL are stakeholders.
It is interesting to note that UL point blank refused to alert or inform former aeronautical engineering students, who had work experience placements in the Irish Army Air Corps, that they were unnecessarily & dangerously exposed to highly toxic chemicals during the placement.
Over approximately 20 years scores of UL students were exposed with some now suffering illnesses common to exposed Air Corps & civillian airbase personnel.
Toxic chemicals they were exposed to without PPE include Benzene, Cresylic Acid, Dichloromethane, Hydrofluoric Acid, Isocyanates, Methyl Ethyl Ketone, nHexane, Toluene, Trichloroethylene and Xylene as well as many different Hexavalent Chromium compounds.
See http://www.accas.info for more.
@Chemical Brothers: is it long term or short term exposure that causes these health issues? For example, alcohol and fags in the long term can causes cancer. In the short term the body can heal and eliminate the toxins.
@Bairéid Rísteard: Very long term. For example Dichloromethane, with an allowable TWA of 50ppm, was measured in ERF in August 1995 at 175ppm. After this was discovered staff were left to rot in this small building resulting in the deaths of at least 5 personnel. 2 x Non Hodgkins 1 x Brain Tumour, 1 x Crohns, 1 x Brain Tumour, 1 x Heart Failure. There was a further non fatal heart attack and a non fatal Hodgkins. All except 2x Non Hodgkins were suffered by young men in their 20s / early 30s. No one was issued with any PPE.
http://www.accas.info/?page_id=142
Note the State Claims Agency (aka NTMA/NAMA) claims personnel were not exposed to dangerous chemicals whatsoever.
@Bairéid Rísteard: Sorry meant to say staff we left to rot in this location for a further 12 years.
Air Quality reports from 1995 & 1997 were ordered destroyed by Air Corps Health & Safety management in 2006 when a stsff member went yellow with a liver injury. Similar liver injuries (Toxic Hepatitis) occurred in Jan/Feb of this year through lack of chemical & PPE training.
@Chemical Brothers: that’s shocking, and very sad for those men and their families. I was recently in a paint hangar (not as a painter), and the ppe standards were abysmal. Seems like history is repeating itself.
@Bairéid Rísteard: Unfortunately this gets a lot worse.
Adult body count has recently reached 20 for serving & former personnel whilst 5 children of personnel are also dead through a combination of cancer & congenital defects.
In recent weeks we have also learned of at least 7 cases of autism/autism spectrum disorder amongst personnel’s children as well as 1 x Cri-Du-Chat syndrome, 2 x trisomy 21 and 1 x XYY syndrome.
Exposed chemicals were carcinogenic, mutagenic and teratogenic and are doing exactly as they said on the tin
Irish Army Air Corps only started to attempt to comply with 1989 chemical legislation in 2016 but it appears to be only a box ticking exercise with little extra resources on the ground and little effort to enforce a safety culture change.
White Collar Crime is rampant all over the place…..bring in CAB….
A great time to release all this bad news to the media, will get lost in a few hours in Garda Scandals ,brexit and Endexit.
Be interesting to see what former president Dr Ed Walsh will say. He surely will be on Newstalk and will blame the secondary school teachers!!
Second big fire in two days in Limerick . This time in the Raheen industrial estate. Do we have an arsonist on the loose I wonder ?
@Catherine Sims: No we don`t , two seperate unrelated incidents
@Tony O Dwyer: And a completely seperate story.
have your say