US 'cannot allow' nuclear N Korea (Merged)

[August]

Originally Posted by *[FOX]* Bort

It is precisely this sort of situation that formed one of the cornerstones of my argument not to have invaded Iraq. North Korea is a far more dangerous state than Iraq ever was, and now has the bomb and a possible means of using against the USA. If we had not gone into Iraq, we could mobilize a massive military response, similar to the Cuban Missile Crisis, reinforcing our forces in South Korea by at least an additional division, preferably several, in addition to multiple CVBG's and additional Air Force Wings from the US in order to show that we will not tolerate a nuclear test. Instead we are handcuffed to idle and noncommittal threats by a lack of deployable forces. The North Koreans tend to be very dense when negotiating, but they do understand force-look no further than Operation Paul Bunyan for proof.

You have to remember that NK is in Chinas sphere of influence. Anything we do to them risks Chinese intervention in support of NK. Besides, stationing more troops in South Korea only puts them squarely in the NK nuclear bullseye.

[Bort]

You have to remember that NK is in Chinas sphere of influence. Anything we do to them risks Chinese intervention in support of NK. Besides, stationing more troops in South Korea only puts them squarely in the NK nuclear bullseye.

China in the early 1950's was a very different country than it is today. In the event of a war between North Korea and UN forces today, I really doubt that China would interfere against the US and its allies. And about the "nuclear bullseye", does that mean that we should just leave S. Korea- Oh my gosh, we might be in danger! Lets get out of there! How about Japan, that's in the 'nuclear bullseye" too! I guess we should just let North Korea be then... Gee, I would have loved to have seen your strategy for the Cold War!

[Konovalov]

My concern is that if North Korea does conduct an underground nuclear test then that could be the catalyst for an even greater arms race down in my home countries neck of the woods along with greater instability within South East Asia. What will Japan's response be? With the ever growing nationalism there along with a new Prime Minister who is more of a nationalist than Junichiro Koizumi ever was. Will they change their pacifist constitution? The question even arose in Japan's parliament yesterday if launching a pre-emptive attack was within the Japanese constitution. These are troubling times.

[Happy Times]

Originally Posted by August

You two must realize that the more countries and groups that have nuclear weapons the more likely that someone will eventually pop one or fifty off right?

Who will guarantee 100% that they will come and fight or strike back for Finland if we are invaded or attacked by nuclear weapons? Would you?

[fredbass]

It is a serious threat when certain countries like N. Korea and Iran acquire the capability to use Nuclear Weapons. It's not something that will be taken lightly by the U.S. and I'm sure that at some point in time those threats will be eliminated, so don't worry folks.

[August]

Originally Posted by *[FOX]* Bort

China in the early 1950's was a very different country than it is today. In the event of a war between North Korea and UN forces today, I really doubt that China would interfere against the US and its allies.

Well thank you very much General MacArthur, for that detailed analysis of Chinese intentions. You know he said the very same thing in 1950 and it got a lot of our people killed, not to mention causing the longest retreat in American Military history so please spare me the sarcasm.

And about the "nuclear bullseye", does that mean that we should just leave S. Korea- Oh my gosh, we might be in danger! Lets get out of there! How about Japan, that's in the 'nuclear bullseye" too! I guess we should just let North Korea be then... Gee, I would have loved to have seen your strategy for the Cold War!

And what purpose would it serve to put more troops in Korea General? You think the South Koreans are going to allow this? We have trouble keeping the troops we have there already, let alone adding an invasion force, and that's exactly what it would be seen as.

[August]

Originally Posted by Happy Times

Who will guarantee 100% that they will come and fight or strike back for Finland if we are invaded or attacked by nuclear weapons? Would you?

Do you seriously think the one or three nukes Finland might be able to build/obtain would keep the Russians from obliterating your country if they had a mind to do so? It might make you feel better to have them but that's all they would be good for.

Besides, it wouldn't be Finland I would worry about. Your premise was that all nations should have nukes. You do not see the danger in a country like Iran or Chad or Somalia or Venezuela or Chechnia having nukes at their disposal?

[The Noob]

Originally Posted by Perilscope

SubSerpent can rant away all he wants from now on, I just included him in my ignore list, thus, I will never see his posts again, never. RANT ON!

Very well, if you haven't included me into your Fancy "Bush-Censor-This-Please-it's-questioning-my-deals-and-is-Anti-America" list jet, then do so.

Just include everyone into your list wich is no american republican, then you can have it here just like at home, with America **** Yeah attitude and Anti America threads blocked so you can't see them. This is so Crazy! You were correct, Bush doesn't censor anything, you censor it yourself. :rotfl:

SubSerpent, i agree with all your posts about this N Korea Subject.

[Happy Times]

Originally Posted by August

Do you seriously think the one or three nukes Finland might be able to build/obtain would keep the Russians from obliterating your country if they had a mind to do so? It might make you feel better to have them but that's all they would be good for.

Besides, it wouldn't be Finland I would worry about. Your premise was that all nations should have nukes. You do not see the danger in a country like Iran or Chad or Somalia or Venezuela or Chechnia having nukes at their disposal?

Nothing technically prevents us making 50, 100, 200 or more. It seems Iran is allowed to build theirs and N-Korea allready might have one. It seems you cant stop them. The only country from your list that could maybe produce them is Venetzuela. Question remains, who will gurantee Finlands sovereignty 100%? It seems were heading in to large wars and theres nothing we can do about it.

[Oberon]

I think that saying that the US cannot allow a nuclear DPRK is a bit late, it already has, the DPRK has at least one nuke, Iran will probably have one shortly, if it hasn't already. So the time of debating on whether we should let them have nuclear weapons is past, now we should be focusing on what we should do now that they have nuclear weapons. Rather than pumping money into mini-nukes and bunker busters, the west should be focusing on ABM strategies, and planning on putting those strategies into place in countries like South Korea and Japan, after all, there's no point in having a nuclear missile if it's not going to reach its target. Once they've launched their compliment of nukes, thus giving away the launch sites and storage areas if we don't know them already, and the nukes are intercepted and destroyed...then it's time to strike back, and then there'll be a perfectly solid reason that no nation can argue against intervention.

Well, one things for sure. If the US or any other nation attacks N.Korea anytime now, you can gurantee that they will use the nukes on the basis of provocation. I say, "Leave them the hell alone" and learn to live with it. It's too late now to go barking up that tree and to do so will mean nuclear war. If we the US attack in a conventional manner it will mean nothing to N.Korea and they will use nukes on the US, Japan, and S.Korea. Any use of nukes from the US on N.Korea spins us into a nuclear war with communist China.

It would be COMPLETELY foolish now to go to war with N.Korea.

There is nothing the US can do to N.Korea now accept to learn to live with them. US is just worried that N.Korea is going to use this new power to gain bargining chips for higher level world politics and for free food.

I think China will keep N.Korea in line, since all the US has to really do is tell china if they don't put their little dog on his leash than we aren't going to buy any more "Nikes" from them. China can't afford this and China (even though they are communist) are trying hard to play the game with a clean nose with the world. They want to be liked and they aren't going to let little 3rd world countries like N.Korea ruin it for them.

[Happy Times]

US spy satellites detect N Korea's nuclear moves

By Colin Joyce in Tokyo and Richard Spencer in Beijing
(Filed: 05/10/2006)

The United States has detected activity in North Korea indicating possible preparations for an underground nuclear test.

Spy satellites have picked up unusual movement of vehicles at potential test sites, although an American official said it did prove that a test was imminent.


The images were seen the day after North Korea said it would conduct its first test, a prospect which Russia, South Korea and Japan yesterday described as "unacceptable".

The issue is expected to dominate a trip by Japan's new prime minister, Shinzo Abe, to China and South Korea to mend deeply damaged relations.

Mr Abe will meet the Chinese president, Hu Jintao, on Sunday and South Korea's President Roh Moo-hyun the following day.

The countries refused to meet Japan's previous leader, Junichiro Koizumi, because of his visits to Yasukuni Shrine, which many say glorifies Japanese aggression in the Second World War.

The Beijing visit, the first by a Japanese prime minister since 2001, had been predicted but China refused to confirm it until yesterday. It has set a tough but simple test for Mr Abe, saying that good relations depended on visits to the shrine being stopped.

Mr Abe has declined to say whether he will visit Yasukuni as prime minister, though he has done so in the past. The summit announcement indicates that some agreement has been reached.

There has been speculation in China that Mr Abe will continue to visit the shrine but in secret. The flamboyant way in which Mr Koizumi paid his respects, often dressed in full Shinto regalia, caused particular offence in Beijing.

The summits became more urgent after North Korea's announcement about its test.

The Japanese are increasingly concerned by the perceived threat from the isolated Stalinist nation.

Mr Abe said yesterday that Japan "simply could not accept" a North Korean nuclear test and Japan has already imposed sanctions on Pyongyang. But analysts believe that Mr Abe will face a tough task in convincing Beijing and Seoul to take a stronger line.

Both countries have adopted a conciliatory approach, though Seoul said a test could cause a "shift" in its policy of engagement.

China balanced its call for North Korea to show restraint with warnings that "all relevant parties", meaning America, should "address their concerns through dialogues and consultations instead of taking actions that may intensify the situation".

China's ambassador to the United Nations said it was opposed to action by the UN Security Council against North Korea and said the issue should be discussed in the long-running "six-party talks" between the two Koreas, America, China, Russia and Japan. North Korea has refused to join those talks for a year in protest at American sanctions.

It is not clear whether North Korea has the ability to carry through its test in the near future, though analysts say that the statement suggests that a political decision has been taken and that America's freezing of North Korean bank accounts has strengthened the hand of hard-liners.

But many sense that an end-game is approaching, either to allow Pyongyang to become a nuclear power or to see an escalation of military tensions. Pak Myong-guk, a North Korean diplomat in Australia, said: "The situation around the Korean peninsula is very tense. It may be breaking out [into] a war at any time." Yu Myung-hwan, the South Korean vice-foreign minister, said a test could prompt Japan to develop its own nuclear weapons.

Some members of the ruling Liberal Democratic Party have supported this option, once considered unthinkable for Japan. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main...5/wkorea05.xml

[Happy Times]

:rotfl: :rotfl:

[Fish]

Originally Posted by SubSerpent

I care about humanity, but at the same time I don't see how N. Korea is really our concern. I say, cutt ties with Japan and let them deal with N.Korea. That goes for China as well.

I am more of a believer that if you don't step on my toes I won't kick you in the shins....If you do step on my toes, prepare to walk funny the rest of your life.

This means that I think the middle east should be dealing with their own problems

This means that the asians in the south pacific region should be dealing with their own. If N.Korea is ever foolish enough to lauch first, then I say go all out on them. For every 1 nuke they have, we have a 1000 or more, so it would be complete suicide for them to even consider launching nukes at us.

Kim Jong Il may be starving his people to death and things may be bad for them. So why don't THEY do something about it? I think its HIGH time that THOSE people stand up and take control of their futures and quit waiting from some miracle nation to come along and win control for them.

As they did in Roemenië.

[Oberon]

Originally Posted by Happy Times

:rotfl: :rotfl:

:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

Brilliant!!