N Korea has 8 nukes and missles that can reach the USA

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by acdninjapan, Sep 28, 2004.

  1. acdninjapan macrumors newbie

    acdninjapan

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2004
    Location:
    The Beaches Tokyo Japan
    #1
    According to S Korean sources-usually reliable as they are very watchful of their neighbours to the north. Pongyang has up to 8 nuclear warheads in its arsenal and is ready to test a new missle with a capability of reaching the continental US.

    Of course the N Korean Gov't blames the US, Japan and the S Koreans for our belligerant attitude and will launch a pre-emptive first strike only in self-defense.

    GWB what are you going to do about this?
     
  2. edesignuk Moderator emeritus

    edesignuk

    Joined:
    Mar 25, 2002
    Location:
    London, England
    #2
    Invade! INVADE! :rolleyes: :(
     
  3. Doc27 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2004
    #3
    If Clinton had done his job right and wasn't such an appeaser when he was in office N. Korea would have 0 nuclear bombs to fire at anyone right now and it wouldn't be GWB's problem. Same problem we have with Iran right now. Either we do something about them now, or later a future president will have to deal with another totalitarian dictator with nuclear powers.
     
  4. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #4
    <snore>

    bush has had nearly four years to do something about it. nice try.

    OT - what do you still blame your parents for?
     
  5. takao macrumors 68040

    takao

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2003
    Location:
    Dornbirn (Austria)
    #5
    Bush will do exactly _nothing_ if North Korea _really_ has nucular weapons, except of course complain about it...
     
  6. Doc27 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2004
    #6
    Why should it be Bush who has to do something? Why can't it be what is China, S. Korea, and Japan is going to do about it? Why can't it be what is the UN going to do about it? Why is it now, what is Bush going to do about it when you know that if he does you would only complain about that too. What can we do about it, except attack and risk them using their nukes on us or others?

    Surely you do not think we should be blackmailed into paying them ransom to not use their nuclear weapons? Everyone knows you don't give in to blackmail, if you do they return for more, indefinitely.
     
  7. makisushi macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2004
    Location:
    Northern VA
    #7
    I can see attacking bush, but was the off topic comment really necessary?
     
  8. takao macrumors 68040

    takao

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2003
    Location:
    Dornbirn (Austria)
    #8
    because _even_ bush would not risk to attack a country with nuclear weapons

    i never said that something should be done about it ... nobody cares about israel,india or pakistan either so ... why should north korea be different ?

    the UN won't do something about it because some countries might be veto-ing it in the security council (make that china or the allied pakistan who already veto against going to sudan)

    nuclear weapons are expensive to maintain..sooner or later they will have to reduce it anyways
     
  9. Taft macrumors 65816

    Taft

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2002
    Location:
    Chicago
    #9
    It depends on whether you consider this unsubstantiated comment to be flamebait:

    If, like me, you consider it flamebait, then some sort of response is justified. Likening the attitude to those who blame their parents for all their own problems is a rather apt retort, if you ask me.

    Taft
     
  10. mischief macrumors 68030

    mischief

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2001
    Location:
    Santa Cruz Ca
    #10
    S Korea is in an odd position. Their populace is fairly hawkish, yet their government has to run the razor-edge of knowing their northern neighbor is nuts, dangerous and desperate.
     
  11. Doc27 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2004
    #11
    Clinton's "Fix" in N. Korea, allowed them to continue their nuclear program unchecked which in turn allowed them to collect the necessary materials that produced their first nuclear bomb. So unsubstatiated isn't the correct word to use here.

    Also the combined posts of
    and
    deserved a response in kind. Like listening to those who seem to want to blame Bush for everything bad, while ignoring actual history of events that took place prior to Bush coming to office.
     
  12. mischief macrumors 68030

    mischief

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2001
    Location:
    Santa Cruz Ca
    #12
    Here's a nasty little tidbit:

    The current agreement among the Nuclear Powers is that any Nuclear attack against any Nation can be seen as an attack against ALL nations and opens the door for a global response. If Kim Jong Il was insane enough to launch a Nuke he'd have about half a hour to drive to the Chinese border before seeing his country reduced to a sea of molten glass and fused girders.

    The real danger is what would happen if China chose to endorse such an attack and ally with N Korea. Suddenly we'd see a Nuclear-equipped World War evolve in a matter of hours into a Global-theater battle of Missile defence and from-the-hip conventional pre-strikes. I could think the whole mess out.... there'd probably be less carnage than you'd guess... but it's still a very nasy picture.

    This is one of the few instances where I feel something HAS to be done... and soon.

    Best actions possible:

    Western countries open their borders to N-Korean defectors and place empty troop-ships off shore to pick up those who want to swim for it.

    Pressure against China to back away from KJI and allow action to be taken against him.

    Covert kidnapping of KJI to transport him to Europe to be tried in the IC for Conspiracy to Commit Global Nuclear Conflagration and all the various nasty things he's done to his people.

    Follow the previous with IMMEDIATE airbourne aid to N Korea's citizenry and UN occupation while the county is rebuilt.


    None of this is, of course practicable as it would require unprecidented international co-operation and unheard of levels of UN Cojones.
     
  13. Shibaiman macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2004
    #13
    Absurd rumor

    If S Korean sources are so reliable, then why do they know nothing about the explosion that took place in N Korea a couple of week ago?

    This is fear-mongering, and I would simply doubt anyone who calls themself "acdninjapan." The Japanese right-wing love to fear-monger as much as the the current President of the US of A.

     
  14. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #14
    Was that your attitude in the run-up to Dubya Dubya II? Did you feel we should pressure the UN to do something about Saddam, or were you arguing that we should ignore the UN and go it alone?

    Ask Bush. He's flop-flopped once again and now adopted the Clinton stance of talking to the DPRK. At first he said he wouldn't negotiate with them, and then he did. Flop-flop.

    So why did he choose to abandon his initial do-whatever-Clinton-didn't strategy and embrace negotiations? And why would you blame Clinton for appeasement, yet not Bush when he does the same thing?
     
  15. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #15
    So you don't think North Korea has nukes? You think they are just pulling one over on the world?
     
  16. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #16
    Well not exactly "unchecked," but without any real alternative when the North Koreans decided to refuse further monitoring. So criticism of the Clinton program is justified. But the Bush policy -- what is that, exactly? And in what way has it halted or even slowed the progress of the North Korean nuclear program?
     
  17. Fukui macrumors 68000

    Fukui

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2002
    #17
    China wouldn't back away from NK because if the north fell, there would be no buffer between the U.S friendly SK and China, and thats something the powers in China don't want... U.S on thier doorstep. Its all a game of chess... so it all comes down to, who is more clever, Bush or KJI.
     
  18. Dont Hurt Me macrumors 603

    Dont Hurt Me

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Location:
    Yahooville S.C.
    #18
    Lets just face the facts folks, Clinton screwed up big time and so has George on this issue. Wouldnt be surprised if the same thing happens in Iran. while Democrats and Republicans fight over everything Iran will continue to move forward on this and by the time both parties pull their heads out of their butts it will be to late and then we will have a Nuclear Iran. Time to put America first instead of the stupid parties. Democrats & Republicans are both to blame.( maybe we should let Israel take care of it like they did to Iraq since they seem to be the only ones with balls to do it.) Destroy the facility now is my 2 cents.
     
  19. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #19
    DHM, you realize that decision would likely doom Seoul?
     
  20. Dont Hurt Me macrumors 603

    Dont Hurt Me

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2002
    Location:
    Yahooville S.C.
    #20
    Sorry Mactastic i ment destroy the Iran facility while we can, its a little late for for N Korea.(thanks Bill & George)
     
  21. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #21
    Right. It's no use talking about striking matches in a gasoline refinery because it isn't going to happen even if it should. I thought the Bush administration took the right position when they refused North Korea's demands for direct talks with the US. The problem is regional, with China the obvious key player. But this problem takes multilateral thinking, something the Bush administration isn't exactly good at doing, which I presume is the reason why we've seen even less progress on the Korea front recently than we did during the Clinton years.
     
  22. wwworry macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2002
    #22
    &

    :eek:
     
  23. mischief macrumors 68030

    mischief

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2001
    Location:
    Santa Cruz Ca
    #23
    Maybe we should stop backing Israel unconditionally and let the region sort itself out. True, much of it would be reduced to a radioactive wasteland and likely the "Holiland" would be rendered uninhabitable but we'd at least have shown the horrifying futility of it all in a more holistic light.

    Personally I think the reconciliation aspect of the creation of Israel has been lost in the atrocity of it's continued unfettered millitarist behaviour.

    Israel is in a position that cannot be defended over the long term. Either it will fall to the ill-will of it's neighbors or it will be forced into a region-wide repeat of the 6 day war.

    Because of the above I find that there is nothing in the example of Israel that can morally, justifiably be used by any other nation to any other purpose. They are a Nation living on borrowed time, as such they are behaving accordingly.
     
  24. yg17 macrumors G5

    yg17

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2004
    Location:
    St. Louis, MO
    #24
    And this is why the Bush, UN, or any other country for that matter shouldn't do a thing about north korea. NK has nukes, there's no question about it, however, I've said all along that NK and their nukes are not a threat. As long as no one bothers them, they won't bother anyone else. So if bush is smart enough to leave them alone, then they'll leave us alone
     
  25. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #25
    taft got my point.
     

Share This Page