US 'cannot allow' nuclear N Korea (Merged)

[Happy Times]

US 'cannot allow' nuclear N Korea

The US will not accept a North Korea armed with nuclear weapons, a top US envoy has said, days after Pyongyang announced plans for a nuclear test.

North Korea must choose either to have a future or to have nuclear weapons "but it cannot have them both", top US negotiator Christopher Hill said.

He did not specify how the US would respond if a nuclear test took place.

The US wants allies to present a common front against the test plans, but talks at the UN have been inconclusive.

"At this stage, there's division," said the US envoy to the UN, John Bolton.



However, state department spokesman Tom Casey said the US hoped to see "some action there in the near future".

Russia and South Korea have said that North Korea's plans to conduct a nuclear test are unacceptable.

Their foreign ministers, Sergei Lavrov and Ban Ki-moon, agreed in a telephone conversation that a test would only aggravate the situation, Russia said.

The new Japanese Prime Minister, Shinzo Abe, is to visit China and South Korea in the next few days.

Diplomatic drive

Mr Hill, Washington's top envoy at stalled six-party talks with North Korea, said the US was rallying its allies in a diplomatic push against Pyongyang.

"I am not prepared at this point to say what we are going to do but I am prepared to say we are not going to wait for a nuclear North Korea, we are not going to accept it," he said.

South Koreans gaze into the North through binoculars on the border
The true extent of the North's nuclear programme is unknown

He said North Korea had reached "a very important fork in the road - it can have a future or it can have these [nuclear] weapons but it cannot have them both".

Mr Hill said the message had been conveyed to Pyongyang's envoy at the UN but had yet to elicit a response.

Mr Hill, Undersecretary of State Nicholas Burns and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice have been in touch with their counterparts in Asia and Europe over the North Korea's planned nuclear test.

They want to send "a strong and unified signal... that these kinds of threats are certainly not acceptable", a state department spokesman said.

Mr Hill has had nuclear talks with North Korea in the past while Mr Burns plays a key role in America's diplomatic efforts to combat Iran's nuclear programme.

Sanctions

China has appealed for calm saying it hopes North Korea will "exercise the necessary calm and restraint".

It says the issue should be handled in a revival of six-nation talks.



North Korea announced its plans for a nuclear bomb test on Tuesday, saying it would boost security in the face of US hostility.

It is thought to have developed a handful of warheads but never before announced it would test one.

US and South Korean reports suggest the North has at least one underground test site.

The North appears increasingly angry at sanctions imposed by the US and other countries on North Korean businesses accused of arms sales and illegal activities.

In 2002, it restarted its nuclear reactor at Yongbyon and forced two UN nuclear monitors to leave the country. It is unclear how far work has progressed at the plant since then. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asi...ic/5408246.stm

I'd say the US is dollar short and a day late then.

[Happy Times]

Originally Posted by SubSerpent

I'd say the US is dollar short and a day late then.

If N-Korea will get it S-Korea and Japan will follow suit. Just like if Iran has one so will the Saudis and maybe Turks. Im starting to think we need one also.

Originally Posted by Happy Times

If N-Korea will get it S-Korea and Japan will follow suit. Just like if Iran has one so will the Saudis and maybe Turks. Im starting to think we need one also.

Why not? Everyone should have some in their arsenal IMHO! They are never going to be used for anything more than to collect dust though.

I can understand the want for nuclear energy and to stop using so much of the worlds precious oil. Maybe if everyone had nuclear energy there would be less demand for the oil?

[August]

Originally Posted by SubSerpent

Why not? Everyone should have some in their arsenal IMHO! They are never going to be used for anything more than to collect dust though.

I can understand the want for nuclear energy and to stop using so much of the worlds precious oil. Maybe if everyone had nuclear energy there would be less demand for the oil?

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?

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?

I disagree! I don't think that there is a person in this whole world that would EVER be crazy enough to use them. For starts, the people under the government of that country would most likely take over their government for even thinking about doing something so nuts, secondly no government would be crazy enough to even consider using them in the first place against another nation that has them.

I think most of these smaller countries like N. Korea want them for self protection. They fear that if they are ever attacked or taken over by a larger nation (like the US) that their whole world would have come to an end. If they have nukes then no country would ever be foolish enough to attack them to begin with.

Look at the US and China for example. China has nukes and USA has nukes. We are both afraid of each other because of this and therefore there will NEVER be a fight between us, NEVER!

If one nation doesn't have nukes and the other one does, there is a MUCH GREATER chance of war happening between them.

It's just like fighting. You wouldn't get in a fight with someone you knew could stomp your a-- into the ground. You'd find a way to avoid it. If you knew you could beat them to a bloody pulp then you would!

[August]

Originally Posted by SubSerpent

I disagree! I don't think that there is a person in this whole world that would EVER be crazy enough to use them. For starts, the people under the government of that country would most likely take over their government for even thinking about doing something so nuts, secondly no government would be crazy enough to even consider using them in the first place against another nation that has them.

It'd be nice if you were right but I don't have any faith in that theory at all.

First off, if you look hard enough you can find someone willing to do anything, including being willing to destroy the planet in a global thermonuclear war.

Secondly, in a country like North Korea the nation goes to war on just one mans say so. No congressional oversight here, Kim would have no problem getting his military to fire a nuke in anger if he wanted it. As for his people, they would never even know about it until afterwards and even then only if the government told them. This is a country where the peoples news and information is 100% state controlled.

And lastly, a nuke can be covertly delivered to its target as easily as it can by missle or bomber. The Chinese, the USA and the Russians may have enough nukes between us to wipe out the entire planet a hundred times over but if we don't know who sent it, how could we respond?

Look at the US and China for example. China has nukes and USA has nukes. We are both afraid of each other because of this and therefore there will NEVER be a fight between us, NEVER!

Bull. India and Pakistan, both nuclear armed nations, have gone to war several times and managed to keep it conventional, the US and China have fought a war too.

But Mao certainly could have ordered a nuclear strike if he chose to, and so could have Stalin, and their orders would have been obeyed without question. You seriously underestimate the power of an entrenched dictatorship. Troops march, ships sail and bombs go off on the word of one man and if that man is insane he is capable of anything.

It's just like fighting. You wouldn't get in a fight with someone you knew could stomp your a-- into the ground. You'd find a way to avoid it. If you knew you could beat them to a bloody pulp then you would!

Again Bull. The nuclear armed might of the United States is capable of instantly vaporizing every muslim country on the planetbut that didn't stop Al Quaeda from attacking us on 9-11, nor would our western social values, which they don't share stop them from using a nuke if North Korea or someone else gave it to them.

[Yahoshua]

Had Germany acquired the bomb they would've used it. Had Japan acquired the bomb, they would've used it against the United States.

Had Germany held out longer than the Japanese, refusing to surrender, we would've bombed Germany as well. Nuclear weapons were nearly used against the United States in the Cuban missile crises.

That nutjob in Iran, equal to the terrorists in Iraq, would be willing to annihilate the arabs near Israel in order to wipe Israel off the map.

Communists have no morals, why should they care whom they hurt, maim, injure and kill. Arabs justify murdering their own brethren by claiming that the deaths of the shachids (martyrs) would give the "collateral damage" a free-ticket to paradise, and the victims would get the same ride.

People are capable of the most gruesome atrocities because they become desensitized to it. If a Waffen SS trooper or an NKVD agent can slit the throats of women, smash children against rail cars, torture, drown, and ultimately kill those who are defenseless with their own hands, how much more difficult is it to achieve the same end with the press of a button?

Not difficult at all.

=========================================

August, are you referring to the "Silent Wars" b/w China and the U.S. as being that of the armed conflicts in Korea and Vietnam?

Curious here.

[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 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?