Feeds

back to article North Korea and Iran sign 'Axis of Tech Evil' deal

Everyone’s favourite naughty nations Iran and North Korea have taken another step closer to each other by signing an agreement on future co-operation in various science and information technology fields. Iranian minister for science, research, and technology Farhad Daneshjoo and North Korean foreign minister Pak Ui-chun inked …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
Silver badge

"The enemy of my enemy is my friend"

Oh, yeah. That always works. Idiots.

5
5
Anonymous Coward

Re: "The enemy of my enemy is my friend"

Yup look no further than the history of Afghanistan and look how the US balls'd that up....come to think of it, add the Iran / Iraq conflict to the list...

4
0
Silver badge
Thumb Up

Re: "The enemy of my enemy is my friend"

As Stalin found out with Hitler.

Those who fail to learn the lessons of history, etc. etc. Sigh.

1
0

Relevant responsibilities

DPRK: provides nuke program knowledge and proven protocols for that.

Iran: provides tech and manufacturing competencies in technologies such as "everything non-nuclear since the fall of the USSR that isn't fake currency".

3
0
Silver badge

Yeah, that'll work

North Korea supply missle parts to Iran? No worries then with *their* record of successful launches then.

5
0

Re: Yeah, that'll work

Iran make reasonably competent missiles and indeed rockets in the Safir-2B and Simorgh SLV.

Seriously, if this isn't a deal which says "DPRK gives Iran the Bomb in return for Iran's designs on Other Stuff" I'll eat my hat.

7
1
Silver badge
Mushroom

Iran must be having problems covering up its nuclear "projects". They have therefore struck a deal that the Uranium will be enriched in N.Korea instead of Iran in return for food.

N.Korea has the advantage of not even needing to hide its nucleur program.

Icon = Obvious

1
0
Silver badge
Meh

Food for uranium?

Except for the fat guy in charge most of the population of North Korea is starving and reliant on food aid.

1
0

Iran and NK make a trade deal.

So everyone thinks it must have evil intent and there is not a chance that they actually just want to improve their economies and have friends in a world increasingly allied against them. Makes sense.

America and China make trade deals (one a war monger with a history of use of WMDs and the other in continual breach of human rights) and everyone thinks that it's great news for the world that these two giants are working together.

(if you don't get it, I find the giants a bit more scary than the insects biting at their heels)

9
4
Silver badge

Re: Iran and NK make a trade deal.

At least giants aren't likely to pick fights with each other. They have too much to lose.

Smaller, poorer, desperate nations (run by crazier people) may see war as a route to definite gain.

3
6
Anonymous Coward

Re: Iran and NK make a trade deal.

(run by crazier people)

Like fuckwit Bush?

6
2
Anonymous Coward

Re: Iran and NK make a trade deal.

At least giants aren't likely to pick fights with each other. They have too much to lose.

But they DO pick fights with innocent bystanders

6
0
Silver badge

Re: Iran and NK make a trade deal.

@AC 1: Fair point, although there were at least people around Bush to stop him doing ultra-stupid things like invade Iran or try to destroy Al jazeera. If one of the Kims ever thought they could get away with invading South Korea again, I have no doubt they would.

@AC 2: I'm not sure the word "innocent bystanders" can always be applied but yes, they do like their proxy-wars.

0
0
JDX
Gold badge

Good on you N. Korea

Everybody needs a friend.

1
0
Trollface

Re: Good on you N. Korea

not so rrronery now I guess... 0_o

2
0
Anonymous Coward

Oil

The US Economic sanctions in the financial services sector are working - it's not possible to buy Iranian goods - even their Oil. I'm sure Iran can bata food and oil for technology and intelligence - I'm sure Iran would like more modern Radar systems and other technology to defend against an attack from Israel - who have the latest weapons systems from the USA.

Don't underestimate the power of uniting people against a common enemy - especially when other than that they have little in common.

1
0
Black Helicopters

Re: Oil

...and right now the various developed world espionage agencies with an agenda are working out how to "divide and conquer" the whole thing. This is probably the best opportunity they've had in years.

2
0
Anonymous Coward

Naughty nations?

How do you define them? By size? By religion? By how far they are from your home?

Last time I checed the most naughty nations were Israelis, Amerikans and Brits. Just count the victims by whatever source you like best. How many countries has Iran jumped on in its recent history (say 100 years)? Before you mention Iraq I am happy to tell you it was Iraq backed by US, UK, Israelis and Sauds who attacked Iran, not vice versa.

One more thing. Before calling someone naughty it is usually OK to reveal one's business, which in the case of UK is the mercantile motives and probably hurt ambition related to the BP's originating from Iran.

9
4

Re: Iran

You are correct: None.

That doesn't make it any less dangerous though, as it's only 'externally-created' impotence and obsolecence that prevents its raging ego-maniac leader from executing on his threats.

1
1
Anonymous Coward

RE: Naughty nations

I think it's blindingly obvious to the world+dog that "naughty" in this regard is a slightly biased reference, given it's written by a UK author, reported on a UK news site, predominately aimed towards a western reader, so thank you for your sensitivity and over-reaction, but you can step off your high horse now.

6
2
Silver badge
Stop

"How many countries has Iran jumped on in its recent history (say 100 years)?"

Just to clarify:

Do we count the nations of the Airlines targeted, the nationality of intended terror victims, or the country where the act takes place?

5
4
Anonymous Coward

Airlines ?

Like the civilian Iranian aircraft shot down by the USA in 1988 while flying in Iranian air space killing all 290 on board (of which 66 were children) ? The USA paid compensation averaging $213k per passenger but did not admit liability.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Air_Flight_655

Pot. Kettle. Black.

3
1
Thumb Down

Before calling someone naughty it is usually OK to reveal one's business...

Slightly hypocritical statement, coming from someone posting as AC. Just sayin'.

3
0
Bronze badge
Thumb Down

Definitions

How about by whether or not their ordinary citizens feel free to criticize their government in public without fear?

That pretty much puts North Korea in the naughty camp, because it doesn't even let its ordinary citizens have the Internet at all. And Iran isn't exactly too great in this category either, although it is light-years ahead of the DPRK.

2
0
Devil

Naughty nations

For the AC OP, I have a challenge for you. I'll go to Trafalgar Square, and then to the National Mall in Washington, and then to Tel Aviv. In each one I'll shout "Down with Obama! Down with David Cameron! Down with Netanyahu!"

You, meanwhile, will go to Tehran and then Pyongyang, and shout "Down with Mahmoud Ahmedinijad! Down with Kim Jong-Un!"

We will then meet up and compare notes on which is the naughtiest nation. Maybe someone will find out what the Iranians or North Koreans did to you some day.

5
2
Anonymous Coward

Re: Naughty nations

@Bumpy Cat

There will be no problem at all in Tehran or Pyongyang - you will not be understood in either of those countries.

Assuming you translate and add in the names of the appropriate leaders, you could add great trading partners of the USA to your list - Saudi Arabia & China - the same type of reaction will be observed...

1
3

Re: Naughty nations

@AC (still hiding behind the AC label, huh?)

Actually, I speak Korean and a little bit of Farsi (well, Dari, but close enough), so I would be understood. It will be up to you to find a phrasebook, or you can resort to sign language maybe. Hip thrusts or something.

The fact that you have to resort to "trade partners" to find eevil in the Western nations says a lot. I can find plenty of cases where the UK and US have criticized human rights in those "trade partners", though. Your argument is pretty pathetic.

2
4
Anonymous Coward

RE: Psyx

How about governments being overthrown? By those belonging to an organisation like oh I don't know... like the CIA?

If you want to know why the revolution succeeded in Iran look no further than this little stunt.

1
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: RE: Psyx

Need to give MI6 some credit - they were involved with the CIA in this. Lesson learnt ? Remove a guy you don't like, he'll get replaced by even worse guys.

There was an excellent program on Channel 4 many years ago and also the Iranians spent years assembling the shredded papers from the US Embassy and published the output in a series of books (I have one of the books) - a lot of it is boring but it gives an insight into the work inside an embassy.

1
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: RE: Psyx

"Need to give MI6 some credit "

Come off it! MI6 can't even find out how one of its own people died almost on its own doorstep, so I can't see them having the spy-ey skills and organisational competence to unseat any government.

0
0
FAIL

Re: RE: Psyx

Yeah, I'm sure what an intelligence service say in public and their actual opinions correlate perfectly.

1
0
Silver badge

Re: RE: Psyx @jaduncan

A fair point, but it remains a fact that a basketful of MI6's dirty laundry has been aired well and truly in public, and a young man employed by them is dead with no convincing explanation of how he died. And the police have made it clear that MI6 have actively obstructed their investigation.

On a number of different counts this doesn't look at all impressive, does it? If they do know and won't say, then maybe they should have kept the whole thing totally out of the press, or very low key. There's plenty of leverage with the press to keep things low key, even if you can't hush it all up.

Perhaps it is all part of a clever plot to suggest that MI6 couldn't find their own @rse with both hands concurrently, in which case it has been successful with the British public, but I suspect that foreign powers judge MI6 by either results or bias alone, rather than Clouseau-esque adverts in the British press.

0
0
Bronze badge

If Iran wanted...

If Iran wanted nukes they'de buy working, tested, operational models from the Pakistanis, not negotiate a deal with NK who've had a stream of failures.

There are plenty of disaffected Pakistani military types who hand a dozen over for a few tens of millions.

1
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: If Iran wanted...

This was the primary concern of the US, the CIA are all over the ISI / Pakistan military w.r.t. nuclear facilities. Shame they don't have more control over the ISI in other respects (it would make the Indians more comfortable viz. further Mumbai attacks).

0
0
FAIL

Re: If Iran wanted...

...and how do you think the US would react to that? It's not about physical supply of nukes, obviously. Because you know, it might just be that geostationary sats are sitting above both Pakistan and DPRK looking for that kind of transfer.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Sharks with laser beams ..

What'll happen when they develop Sharks with frickin' laser beams attached to their heads ..

"Everyone’s [ the USA] favourite naughty nations Iran and North Korea .. Intelligence services [the CIA] from western countries [the USA] will certainly be keeping a close eye on any deepening ties .. US officials already suspect North Korea of providing Iran with ballistic missile parts. [Israel would like the USA to go to war with Iran]

0
0

Blaming George W. Bush again... huh?

Article author writes, "Iran and North Korean may have little in common ideologically but both have apparently been driven closer by a shared enemy – a closeness that was cemented when former president George W Bush referred to the two as part of an “axis of evil” along with Iraq."

I am undertain how the author of this article could suggest such a thing, in good conscience.

The Axis of Evil speech illustrated existing solidified relationships. The results of this speech drove a wedge to help break those relationships apart.

It was shortly after this time that the existing nuclear trade between Pakistan, Iran, Libya, North Korea, and Iraq was all blown wide open!

Iraq was violating their cease-fire agreement for about a decade; the bogus cease-fire agreement (restraint by the allies) was formally ended with allies resuming hostilities after the U.N. discovered illegal weapons which were developed during the cease-fire; Lybia peacefully ceasing their nuclear development (after the Iraqi invasion); North Korea continually violated the Korean War Armistice Agreement (before and after) by trying to build nuclear capabilities; Pakistani nuclear father was found to be proliferating nuclear assets to Iran, North Korea, Libya; via underground nuclear trade; Pakistan exchanging nuclear centrifuges for missile technology with North Korea; Pakistan offering nuclear centrifuge technology to Iran; Pakistan providing nuclear technology to Libya; Pakistan offering centrifuges to Iraq, etc. - it was a crazy number of years.

These relationships were solidified during the Clinton Years - when America found itself fat & happy, and withdrew from the world (including former hotspots like Afghanistan [who considered America an ally, during the war against the Soviets, but became disallusioned when America disappeared from Central Asia instead of remaining to demonstrate their friendship.])

Ironically, America is poised to do the exact same thing, again, after assisting Afghans against the [formerly?] Arab controlled Al-Qaeda. The Obama announcement of a withdrawal and the possible ceasing of engaging the Afghanistan with security and constructive economic dialog may doom their Central-Asian civilization for another quarter century. This is what some Afghani friends of mine feared, before the last elections when W was leaving office on his final term - they feared America could be an unreliable friend.

Clearly: disengagement drew illegal activities within these nations together; engagement brought closure to many of these illegal activities. Unfortunately - North Korea is a festering sore which neither engagement or disengagement [by any U.S. President] has been able to help heal. My heart goes out to the Korean people.

0
0
This topic is closed for new posts.