Madness Returns

[cashman]

good article steeljack, and as iantow says its certainly a tough one, my view is at the end of the day theres 8 nations already have nuclear weapons, and i wouldn't say all 8 leaders are the safest pair of hands? on the track record of some of these leaders, why shouldn't N.Korea have one as well? my personal opinion is NO one should have them.

[Ianto.W.]

Originally Posted by mani

see what i think is that usa is nothing short of hypocritical

it uses the UN defence council to its own means...

example

india/pakistan test bombs and sanctions are placed by UN. usa/india sign big business deal - sanctions lifted. pakistan allows usa to use its soil for afganistan and iraq - sanctions lifted. usa refuses to supply pakistan with f-16's china agrees to supply pakistan with fighters. f-16's a few months later deleivered to pakistan.

the same will happen with this. russia and china who have very good diplomatic links wiht n korea will simply continue as normal and usa will realise its on the end of a financial disadvantage - esp when it comes to china and will take steps to improve relations.

with china on its doorstep - n korea is under no false illusions that it is s-asia's big boy. its not. the fact that usa has continued such a one sided support program of japan and s-korea its pushed n korea to facilitate its own defences.

Ten out of ten for that view Mani, I did not look at the situation from N Koreas camp, but it makes sense now, thank's.

[Bazf]

see what i think is that usa is nothing short of hypocritical

it uses the UN defence council to its own means...

example

india/pakistan test bombs and sanctions are placed by UN. usa/india sign big business deal - sanctions lifted. pakistan allows usa to use its soil for afganistan and iraq - sanctions lifted. usa refuses to supply pakistan with f-16's china agrees to supply pakistan with fighters. f-16's a few months later deleivered to pakistan.

the same will happen with this. russia and china who have very good diplomatic links wiht n korea will simply continue as normal and usa will realise its on the end of a financial disadvantage - esp when it comes to china and will take steps to improve relations.

with china on its doorstep - n korea is under no false illusions that it is s-asia's big boy. its not. the fact that usa has continued such a one sided support program of japan and s-korea its pushed n korea to facilitate its own defences.




The US are often badmouthed, particularly at the moment, as people see their foreign policy as purely looking after their own interests. Well they do, but in their case it is in their interests to stop other nations becoming powerful via the proliferation of weapons, which in fact serves the purposes of everyone on the planet who do not want to see a World War again.

We can't pretend to live in a perfect world where it is ok for everyone to have massive weapons, and I for one would rather they stayed in the hands of the americans, who by the way are our ALLIES, than have them in the hands of a communist nutcase who has openly stated that he would sell the technology to the highest bidder.

The Americans would PREFER Korea to be a united country without Nuclear weapons as well which is why they wanted Kim to stop trying to build them. Now that he has got them, as the leaders of the Western World, they can't just sit back and let him continue to build an Arsenal and then watch as he marches into S Korea as no-one tries to stop him because they are under threat of Nuclear Attack.

As their nearest neighbours, the Chinese should be the ones taking the responsibility for dealing with N Korea but unfortunately they haven't done so, so the UN needs to step in, and its the US who make things happen there.

Can we put sanctions on a nation where millions are sarving? how many of the people died from lack of food because he was using all the money to build nuclear weapons?

now mani I don't want to pick holes in your argument but the f16 deal was quashed because the Pakistani's wanted the updated missile codes which the US won't give them because they are not part of NATO, so they had to look elsewhere hence China stepping in.

China is trying to become a trading nation and as such has lifted a lot of restrictions that it imposed for a lot of years, for example you no longer need to use a chinese bank to do business, you no longer need a member of the ruling party as a trading partner and you can vist the factories that are producing your goods.

The main thing to remember is you have a dictator that is starving his people, and wants ultimate power in a region that has been stable since the 50s. If you think that because he can tell the USA to F off by getting nukes that he's a good old boy ,you really need to reexamine your way of determining your affiliations.

[simon]

I wonder what the enviromental effect of testing NUKES is ???????

[SPUGGIE J]

Originally Posted by simon

I wonder what the enviromental effect of testing NUKES is ???????

Maybe plenty but the states have been practicing zapping "Little Kim"

[LancYorkYankee]

Quite well said Bazf. Your thread beat me to the punch!

[JohnW]

You're right of course Cashman, no-one should have nuclear weapons, however, they are a fact of life and they are not going away, so that is not even a option worth considering. No-one will ever trust the other countries in the world enough to disarm competely. So, they are here to stay and we have to learn to live with that. Also, I have never fully understood how countries who have nuclear weapons consider they have the right to tell smaller countries that they can't develop them. Can you imagine when the longbow was invented one lot saying to the other lot, "Hey, WE invented the longbow, you lot can't come in to battle and use them against US." How ridiculous. Mr. Churchill tried this kind of tack with America when the Yanks were building up their navy and it looked as if they would eventually have more ships than the Brits. Churchill told them they shouldn't do that, that the British navy needed to be the most powerful in the world because we had a Commonwealth to service. Yea! Like that worked!!

So, I really don't see how we can stop countries building them, we just have to have many more and better ones, which, of course, we do. We also need to ensure that our defences against their, less sofisticated, weaponry is adequate. That is the only deterrent against them using their bombs. I have to say, it would appear that the total destruction of the earth gets nearer with every passing year. As long as there are men on earth, you can bet your life there'll be trouble.