headlights on all day

The latter is not the UN's job.

Reply to
Daniel J. Stern
Loading thread data ...

What /IS/ the UN's job? Last time I checked, the UN was useless, anyway.

Reply to
Ioannis

Neither is the former.

Reply to
Brent P

To dither around for a week trying to decide whether to *strongly reprimand* or *firmly censure* North Korea, as it seems.

Reply to
Daniel J. Stern

Did they do the same when the US last tested a nuclear device?

Reply to
Dave Plowman (News)

Hoogeeze, here we go with your little smug Brit routine again. Do us all a favour: Just call me a Nazi, trigger Godwin's Law and let's end the thread.

Reply to
Daniel J. Stern

Perhaps you should have mentally done that before *you* made such a contentious comment on a group were it's OT.

Reply to
Dave Plowman (News)

Prior art:

formatting link

Reply to
Richard Sexton

When did that occur?

Reply to
jcr

Sometime in the 1960s?

However Nagasaki was some test wasn't it?

Sir Hugh of Bognor

The difference between men and boys is the price of their toys. Intelligence is not knowing the answer but knowing where and how to find it!

Hugh Gundersen snipped-for-privacy@h-gee.co.uk Bognor Regis, W.Sussex, England, UK

Reply to
hsg

The US tested from around '45 to '62 some 1054 devices. So North Korea might have quite some way to go to catch up.

Reply to
Dave Plowman (News)

Actually, 1962 was the last year for US atmospheric tests, but underground testing apparently went on for another 30 years!

formatting link
Tom K.

Reply to
Tom K.

Kim Jong-il may well not represent a safe pair of hands to hold a Nuclear capability but I can see some confusion arising from the assumption that GW Bush does!

David

Reply to
David Lee

There were underground tests in Nevada long after 62.

Reply to
Richard Sexton

Does any nation besides the USA prohibit ECE-compliant (that aren't also FMVSS 108 compliant) headlamps on new or imported vehicles?

Reply to
Arif Khokar

Eggsactly. ;-)

Of course you could argue there are no 'safe hands' for a nuclear capability.

Reply to
Dave Plowman (News)

This is not the group for this discussion but the short answer is (and I was in US and NATO nuclear positions) that the western powers have developed a "two-man" control system that does not let even the head of state to unilaterally "push the button." Even in the famous Nixon rages, it was known that he couldn't issue a unilateral order.

The difference is that the dictators of North Korea and Iran have no such limitation, and they have both declared (don't ask me for a cite, I don't want to get into this) that they will be going to war when they have nuclear weapons.

Reply to
Billzz

No.

Reply to
Daniel J. Stern

(I love this part)

"Gee Dan, why is that? Why doesn't the US allow E-code lamps and how heavily is this enforced?

Reply to
Richard Sexton

From Daniel's past posts, I get the impression that it is strictly enforced if one tries to import a vehicle.

But, since automakers follow an "honor system" of sorts with regards to FMVSS compliance, could they not technically get away with equipping their vehicles with ECE specification headlamps from the factory as long as they never reported it? Even if someone does rat them out, they could always file a petition of inconsequential noncompliance and point to the lack of a pile of dead bodies as evidence that ECE headlamps should be allowed.

As for my personal experience having ECE specification headlamp assemblies in my Audi for the last 5 years, not one police officer or inspection station has ever taken notice (despite the fact that my vehicle lacks the amber side marker reflectors on the front).

Reply to
Arif Khokar

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.