|
||||||
| FAQ | Members List | Calendar | Today's Posts | Search |
Topic Review (Newest First)
|
| Mar 11th, 2003 09:57 AM | |
| mburbank |
Tell the South Koreans that. And you mean you think they cannot be allowed to develope MORE Nuclear weapons, since they've already been 'allowed' to develop some. Since they have them, you can call it 'nuclear blackmail' or 'aid' like we'd have given Turkey if they bent over for us, but we have to deal. Not Dictate. It shouldn't be so distatsteful. After all 'nuclear blackmail' is pretty much what we hold over the heads of everyone else on earth. Your position, much like our current international policy is that the US will decide who is 'alllowed' to do what and back it up with the Army. If the UN cares to rubber stamp those aims, swell. If that stamp isn't inked and poised then they're irrelavant and we'll decide on who's 'allowed' what and what the punishment for noncompliance is. Now, you might not think of that as Globa lHegemony, but oddly a lot of the rest of the world does. I'm all in favor of real diplomacy. So far, our Adminstration has said we'll talk but not negotiate (which seems kind of pointless) We will talk, but only oif other folks are there and Don't worry we promise moving Bombers capable of delivering Nuclear weapons to Guam is just a proactive measure and we really would never strike first, even though we're about to in Iraq, and by the way, we can't really sit down at the tbale now becuase were too busy preparing to invaded Iraq, but don't let that make you nervous. Oh, and also? If we DO go ahead and bomb your nuclear facilities, please don't take that as a sign that we're going to subject you to forcible "Regime Change" and figure you've got nothing to loose and Nuke South Korea or Japan, 'cause we just want to disable your nuclear program and we'd never invade the way we're about to in Iraq. Seriously. Don't get all nutty. |
| Mar 10th, 2003 04:24 PM | |
| Ronnie Raygun |
Well, you obviously just did.... I think we should try diplomacy indirectly and if it doesn't work put our carriers in their waters and bomb the nuclear facilities. They cannot be allowed to develop nuclear weapons. |
| Mar 10th, 2003 02:40 PM | |
| mburbank | Have you concidered changing your name to unread? |
| Mar 10th, 2003 02:34 PM | |
| The Unseen | Earth sucks |
| Mar 10th, 2003 12:43 PM | |
| mburbank |
"I would not be surprised if we hit those Nuclear power plants by the end of the year....not at all." But what are you in favor of, Naldo? Put your cards on the table. I wouldn't be surprised either, especially with us suddenly talking about pulling our troops out of South Korea (ie. out of the range of most of their missles and ready for a counter attack once South Korea has absorbed the damage) But honestly, who gives a little tin crap what either of us wouldf be surprised by? What do you think? Should we bomb their nuclear facilities and hope they don't overreact? I think we should let Israel do it. They've done it before, and they certainly owe us for turning a blind eye when they run bulldozers over pregnant women. |
| Mar 9th, 2003 09:55 PM | |
| GAsux |
Good call I think that's a good idea Ronnie. Let's call those chink bastards bluff! Let's gamble with millions of people's lives and see if they really CAN strike back at Americans! I think they're just bullshitting. As long as it doesnt affect my family, I'm willing to risk it to find out. God knows if they have the nerve to talk bad about us in public forums the deserve it! Hey, let's just ship Americas young men and women straight from Iraq over to N. Korea once we've eradicated the world of Saddam? HOw about that? To hell with bringing them home, let's just send them from country to country in a glorioius conquest! Stupid slant eyes. |
| Mar 9th, 2003 08:49 PM | |
| Ronnie Raygun |
Maxi, what do you think about North Korea selling WMD to keep their failing regime alive? Also, blaming W. for the actions of North Korea simply won't work due to the fact that they were cheating on the Clinton/Carter treaty long before W. even decided to run for office. It's clear that pandering to these people is NOT the answer. North Korea is an evil regime that starves millions of it's own people. W. called it right. I would not be surprised if we hit those Nuclear power plants by the end of the year....not at all. |
| Mar 9th, 2003 08:05 PM | |
| theapportioner |
MAD policy works when only a few parties have nuclear weapons -- the game is tightly controlled. When every Tom, Kim, and Pervez has one however it won't be as effective. To draw a parallel, it's like how in markets, game theory works most effectively when the players are fewer in number. When things get democratized everything breaks down. I do think there is a real threat that some nasty terrorist organization would acquire a "loose nuke" and use it. Since there is no obvious counterattack target, and since they want to be martyrs anyway, the MAD doctrine would fail here too. N. Korea may be sabre-rattling, but I won't get too much into armchair analysis of that situation. From other accounts I've read though, it seems that Kim Jong Il may be genuinely nuts. |
| Mar 9th, 2003 07:05 PM | |
| mburbank |
The key question is more, would you? I wouldn't, for two reasons. First, Nukes are good deterents. I wish there were none, but in the era of nuclear weapons, both enemies having them has helped keep the peace. Since we have enough to anihilate the world several times over, the fact that our enemies want a few is disturbing but not surprising. If we dialed down our nuclear capacity to say, just enough to destroy the world three quarters of a time, maybe other countries would feel less threatened. Second, cultural Hyperbole. A statement like that from North Korea means way less than it would if it came from a Western Country. What they are saying is a message saying that the West needs to take them seriously and negotiate. I'd much rather deal with 'nuclear blackmail' otherwise known as 'pre-emption' than Nuclear War. The U.S. is scrupulous in never ruling out the use of Nuclear weapons. Well, the North Koreans believe it. Th flip side of this is that the Koreans don't understand our rhetoric any better than we understand there's. When W. broke off ('re-evaluated')relations with them immediately upon being placed in office, named them part of the Axis of Evil, stated in a press interview that he 'loathed' Kim and then made it obvious he intends to bring about 'regime change' in Iraq with the full force of the US military behind him... Well, Kim took that all as a serious threat, instead of just the American style swaggery cowboy saber rattling voter hypontism it was. But I sense I devious undercurrent to what your sayng. You want the response "Hell no, they got them some nukes!" so you can respond "Well. Shouldn't we tackle Iraq BEFORE they get nukes?" If our foreign policy is going to be something along those lines, we need to get cracking. There are lots of countrys out there that want Nukes and don't like or are afraid of us. In fact, the more belicose we become, the longer the list gets. If we expect to keep all those countries from acquiring WMD, we'll need a much larger army, so you should start doing push ups Naldo. |
| Mar 9th, 2003 06:25 PM | |
| Anonymous | I'd deal with the people that are actually threatening us, and not Iraq. |
| Mar 9th, 2003 10:57 AM | |
| Ronnie Raygun |
With talk like this, what do YOU think Bush should do? Would you support a pre-emptive strike against North Korea's nuclear facilities? ..................... http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/...826533281.html Pyongyang: We'll put a torch to New York By Shane Green, Herald Correspondent in Tokyo March 8 2003 North Korea would launch a ballistic missile attack on the United States if Washington made a pre-emptive strike against the communist state's nuclear facility, the man described as Pyongyang's "unofficial spokesman" claimed yesterday. Kim Myong-chol, who has links to the Stalinist regime, told reporters in Tokyo that a US strike on the nuclear facility at Yongbyon "means nuclear war". "If American forces carry out a pre-emptive strike on the Yongbyon facility, North Korea will immediately target, carry the war to the US mainland," he said, adding that New York, Washington and Chicago would be "aflame". A pre-emptive strike on Yongbyon is one of the strategic options in the crisis over North Korea's nuclear arms program. The US has deployed 24 long-range bombers to the Pacific base of Guam capable of launching such a strike. Mr Kim, who has written a text studied by North Korean military leaders, predicted North Korea would restart its reprocessing plant to make weapons-grade plutonium this month. A nuclear weapon would be produced by the end of next month, with another five by the end of the year, he said. This was on top of a suspected nuclear arsenal of 100 weapons. The ultimate aim of North Korea's leader, Kim Jong-il, was the "neutralisation of the American factor" in the region, Mr Kim said. This would be achieved by striking a non-aggression pact with the US or becoming an "official" nuclear power, thereby making the US nuclear umbrella in the region irrelevant. "Both ways, Kim Jong-il is a winner," Mr Kim said. "By the end of the year, I predict Bush will be in Pyongyang suing for peace," Mr Kim said. While his comments are extreme, they match the heated and belligerent rhetoric of North Korea, which has previously warned of nuclear war and turning the cities of its enemies into a "sea of ashes". The Bush Administration yesterday made renewed calls on China and other countries in the region to help broker a solution to the crisis. In his live televised press conference, Mr Bush said North Korea's nuclear program was a regional issue. "I say 'regional' because there's a lot of countries that have got a direct stake into whether or not North Korea has nuclear weapons," Mr Bush said. "We've got a stake as to whether North Korea has nuclear weapons. China clearly has a stake as to whether or not North Korea has a nuclear weapon." The Bush Administration is pushing for multilateral talks with North Korea but the communist state wants direct talks with Washington. In the meantime, diplomatic activity is continuing behind the scenes. "We have a number of diplomatic initiatives under way - some of them very, very quietly under way - to see if we cannot get a multilateral dialogue started," the US Secretary of State, Colin Powell, told a US Senate Committee. Yesterday the US also flagged the possible withdrawal of its 37,000 troops from South Korea, part of the rethink of a deployment in place since the end of the Korean War in 1953. The US Defence Secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, said the US was consulting with South Korea and he suspected "we'll end up making some adjustments there". "Whether the forces come home or whether they will move further south of the [Korean] peninsula or whether to some neighbouring area are the kinds of things that are being sorted out," he said at a "town hall" meeting in Germany. |
