N.Korea Testing it's Nuke

[Trajan]

To my fellow Americans, what do you think we should do if N. Korea continues it's plan to test one of their nukes? Should we attack them and invade or should we just stand by and continue diplomatic talks? If we attack them, the war will be bad for everybody. Also we still have major problems in Iraq so we would probably have to bring back the draft. If we just stand by, N. Korea could launch nukes at us or some other nation in the long run causing probalby a World War III.

[lila-laune-bär]

1. If N.K. has the bomb, a war would get awful.
2. N.K. has the 4th (?) largest army in the world.
3. The US forces have to deal with "post" war Iraq.

Diplomatics are the only option in my opinion.

[fallingstar]

2. N.K. has the 4th (?) largest army in the world.

Then who is 1, 2 and 3? *tongue*

[Thales of Miletus]

@lila-laune-bär: North Korea has no ICBMs. And I don't believe the army numbers given out by the regime.

What would it benefit North Korea if they launched a nuke at any country? They would loose this war. Their nuclear program targets at nuclear deterrence, just like any other nuclear program in the world.

[Trichobezoar]

THis is a really messy issue.
THe U.S. CANNOT enter any war without a lot of foreign support, which would probably be avaible if North Korea refuses to cooperate with diplomacy. If a war did break out the US would probably have an ally in Japan, beacause the Japanese are threatened just as much as we are, and hopefully the UN would support a war if it happened.

But war can only be started if diplomacy fails horribly. The UN and the US must do anything possible to to create a deal of some kind to limit NKs nuclear power.

[meh_cd]

I have no idea. If they test it hopefully the UN will get in a huffy and actually take some serious action.

[Thales of Miletus]

I wonder how this will affect the ties between China and North Korea.

The regime started this program because it fears an American assault since Bush announced the fall of Kim Jong Il in late 2001 and delivered this lovely "Axis of Evil" speech in 2002.

[MarkQuinn]

N.K. has the 4th (?) largest army in the world.

I seem to recall back in 1991 having the 4th largest army in the world didn't save a certain country from suffering the most humiliating defeat in recent military history.

MQA

[DarthJames]

(1st'ly i'm a Brit, albeit one who completely supports the war in Iraq. How rare is that eh?)

N. Korea's nuclear option is a fuzzy one to deal with.
The US army is all tied up in Iraq. There is no way that a full ground invasion will be possible in the near future. Secondly, an invasion would be very risky because of the possiblity that the koreans would just drop a nuke on the invading force.

However actual use of a nuke is unlikely in the extreme (not allowing for slightly insane dictator syndrome). It's something to stop the USA from invading N. Korea, as Bush has hinted at doing before.


As far a political pressure goes, remember that NO ONE in the region will be happy at Kim Jong Ill having nukes. There will be talks, and probably one of three options:

1) He keeps the nukes and everyone is unhappy.
2) Everyone gives aid concessions to N. Korea in exchange for disarmament.
3) (the one I prefer) Everyone puts sanctions on N. Korea and stops all aid, until they disarm.

Don't forget that N. Korea is almost entirely dependend on foreign (I.e. US) food aid. If that got cut off, then the country would be crippled. The problem is, going by the government enforced weight loss program they have over there, the suffering of the peasents might not be enough to raise political pressure.

One thing that really angers me (It hasn't happened in this thread yet, but I bet it well) is people talking about the 'sovereign rights' of countries that have a dictatorship. When they talk about that they are not talking about a people's right to be self-governed, but a dictator's right to treat a country as his own private property. I belive that world powers (such as the US) have a duty to step in wherever possible to remove dictatorships and promote the spread of democracy. If it's good for us, then it's good for everyone.

EDIT: ok that turned into a bit of a rant. I'm not going off topic, I'm just pre-emptively responding to the first person to post in outrage about considering regime change in N.Korea.

[LegionnaireX]

I hope that the issue of North Korea's wmd's will be handled diplomatically, although I have my doubts this is the way it will play out. If they test a nuke, I have a feeling many nations in that region and around the world will come together to settle the issue (using strong diplomatic solutions such as cutting of aid, or by using force, which I think may turn out to be a mistake if this happens). The only thing I can say for sure is, that if they bomb Japan, China, or the west coast of the US, the next morning there will be no such thing as North korea.

[Thales of Miletus]

At first, the terrible dictatorship in North Korea was protected by the USSR, then by China and now it will be protected by the nuke. A change from inside doesn't look possible.

[fallingstar]

Haven't korea already lauched a nuke into the sea just a few miles from Japan, what did they do that for?

Foerign aid??? I though korea grow their own food, what countries in asia today get that foreign food supply is it free?

[Zuwxiv]

Um..... I don't think anyone agrees with me, but...

So what if North Korea has a nuke? So what if they have 20? Adn they don't have ICBM capability, but if they did, so what?

The US has nukes and ICBM's, why can't they? Do you think they would just randomly nuke the US? They would all die. Nobody is that stupid.

With the possble exception of Bush.

I just don't get why we think we can say "NO, you suck, we get them and you don't, Because." (taunting gesture)

The US has no right to do that whatsoever. None. Aren't we supposed to be the leaders of equality? So why do we think of ourselves as more equal than others?

[Maximus I]

becasue people still live in american propaganda age of communist=bad, americans=saviours so that's why everyone think that if n.korea gets a nuke its automatically a bad thing.

[Gelatinous Cube]

North Korea has no oil, don't expect the US to invade them while Bush (or likely any republican predecessors who follows the Bush ideals) is in office.I'd support that war though. Saddam might have been a bad guy, but he wasnt insane. If he had a nuke, he'd use it for deterrence. I feel the same way about Iran. Kim Jong Il (or however it's spelled) is, quite simply put, an egotistical madman. He really ought not to have nukes.

[GeneraL_ScienCe]

You have a good point Zuwxiv. But than someone can always say, what if the US or the UN didnt care who had what. Than people would be mass producing nukes like crazy. Than what? Some kid finds a nuke in their parents closet and blows the world up.

Alittle drastic i kno, but if people werent soo aware and on gaurd about this issue, than there would be a bigger issue of too many nukes and no one cares who has them. You can argue about it all you want, but someone has to be a bully in this kinda problem...or there would be bigger ones later on.

-ScienCe!

[DrakKassleron]

One thing that really angers me (It hasn't happened in this thread yet, but I bet it well) is people talking about the 'sovereign rights' of countries that have a dictatorship.* When they talk about that they are not talking about a people's right to be self-governed, but a dictator's right to treat a country as his own private property.* I belive that world powers (such as the US) have a duty to step in wherever possible to remove dictatorships and promote the spread of democracy.* If it's good for us, then it's good for everyone.

Dictatorships do not always work like that. Not All of them are single people controlling everything in their Country. Some of them are, others are not. Dictatorships do not have a "Sovereign Right". They are Countries, just like America and Britain. We are interfering in their country just because we believe that our government is so much better than theirs, and by saying this we are saying that we believe, in effect, that they do not have a right to govern themselves. How can it be true that Britain and America have a right to have Nukes any more than they do? How can we show that we are any better than them, considering that we(Britain)have far more nukes than North Korea, and they are far more advanced and much more capable of firing over a massive distance. And what about America? They have 10,000+ Nukes. Why do they have any more right to have Nukes than North Korea? Because Bush says that "Civilized Nations are peaceful, and don't use weapons of mass destruction" ? Do you really believe that Man?

More Importantly, North Korea is developing Nukes for precisely the Same reasons as Iran(May)be trying to do so.....they feel threatened by America, and by the speech Bush made about them being part of an "Axis of Evil". If America owns Nukes, why shouldn't North Korea or Iran? They are Nations just like us, and even if the Dictators are actually Evil, it is not our place to interfere in the internal affairs of their nations. The People may not want to be liberated, so what right do we have to force Democracy onto them? It seems like Democracy is the best form of Government in the world, to almost everyone in the world, and almost everyone in the west. And we still believe this, despite the fact that Our Governments took us to War against Iraq two years ago based on false claims about WMDs. It has been proven that they lied. If the Leader of a Democracy lies, how is he any better than a Dictator? And even if he isn't quite as bad, what gives him the right to decide how other nations govern themselves? Especially if he lies.

[meh_cd]

Originally posted by Zuwxiv@May 7 2005, 06:11 PM
Um..... I don't think anyone agrees with me, but...

So what if North Korea has a nuke? So what if they have 20? Adn they don't have ICBM capability, but if they did, so what?

The US has nukes and ICBM's, why can't they? Do you think they would just randomly nuke the US? They would all die. Nobody is that stupid.

With the possble exception of Bush.

I just don't get why we think we can say "NO, you suck, we get them and you don't, Because." (taunting gesture)

The US has no right to do that whatsoever. None. Aren't we supposed to be the leaders of equality? So why do we think of ourselves as more equal than others?

Kim Jong Il is a freaking madman - I wouldn't let the guy even touch a galdang nuke. Iran I can handle, but not North Korea.

Nice way to sneak Bush bashing into your post, too. Want to at least try and stay on topic?

[barbarion horde]

The U.S is not so worried about the North Koreans having nukes for detterence, but them(North Koreans) selling them to the highest bitter to other regimes around the world or terrorist groups like Al Queda, the Regime doesn't have ICBMs to properly launch Nukes. So if they do have a nuclear stockpile they'll sell it to the highest bitter to start themselves off.

[SonofSparta]

Originally posted by Zuwxiv@May 7 2005, 05:11 PM
Um..... I don't think anyone agrees with me, but...

So what if North Korea has a nuke? So what if they have 20? Adn they don't have ICBM capability, but if they did, so what?

The US has nukes and ICBM's, why can't they? Do you think they would just randomly nuke the US? They would all die. Nobody is that stupid.

With the possble exception of Bush.

I just don't get why we think we can say "NO, you suck, we get them and you don't, Because." (taunting gesture)

The US has no right to do that whatsoever. None. Aren't we supposed to be the leaders of equality? So why do we think of ourselves as more equal than others?

And out of the Ashes of this Loopy Thread Come's Reason!..I agree with all of the above statement and take heart from the fact that it is an american who posted said statement...Yippy! :w00t

I also love the Term "Economic Sanctions" that a few people have brought up..let's just elaborate on what that really mean's....making an already bad situation in North Korea into a much worse one i.e. ALOT of people are going to starve to death.