Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So just in case anybody's not following you –*you want to agree with me that NK currently has a minimal record of military aggression in comparison to most nuclear states?
Have you wondered why? Think about it a moment, the (obvious to most) answer might just jump out at you.
Have you wondered why? Think about it a moment, the (obvious to most) answer might just jump out at you.
OK, thank you for acknowledging that North Korea, while undoubtedly a horrid place, is has committed much less aggression on the world stage than most of the major powers.
OK, thank you for acknowledging that North Korea, while undoubtedly a horrid place, is has committed much less aggression on the world stage than most of the major powers.
Hey Roger irrelevant, has/Did that's not the point I am making and you know it. The point is the US for all of its flaws is not a country hell bent on conquering, the same can be said of the other nuclear powers, and lets face it, if you are a nuclear power and you wanted to you could. North Korea on the other hand have not had the power to conquer, if they get nuclear power would you 'trust' them more than the UK, US, France, Russia etc? I bloody wouldn't.
Hey Roger irrelevant, has/Did that's not the point I am making
Here's the point you made, that I responded to:
Quote:
It depends on your 'agenda' and how much of a lunatic you are. It certainly means that countries with nuclear warheads have the power to defend themselves against 'any' foe, in my book that's a 'superpower', lets all be thankful that the superpowers (those with nuclear warhead capabilities) are all pretty 'benign' countries NOT hell bent on 'invade and conquer' (N. Korea on the other hand....).
You have said that Britain, France, Russia, China, and the US are 'benign' –*though they've invaded hundreds of territories between them.
I see the point Mr Porridge is making. I think a more important way of looking at it in a nuclear context is that NK is the only nuclear-armed state that is, in no uncertain terms, regularly threatening to use its nuclear weapons to wipe out other countries. It may just be rhetoric, but in the Mexican standoff that is nuclear diplomacy, it is very dangerous.
I see the point Mr Porridge is making. I think a more important way of looking at it in a nuclear context is that NK is the only nuclear-armed state that is, in no uncertain terms, regularly threatening to use its nuclear weapons to wipe out other countries. It may just be rhetoric, but in the Mexican standoff that is nuclear diplomacy, it is very dangerous.
Well, all nuclear states have to be ready to use their nukes to wipe out (or at least, inflict huge damage on) other countries – otherwise having nukes wouldn't be a deterrent against attack. *
The universal principle, though, is 'no first use'. As we know, the only country so far to have violated this principle is the US, and here is a whole other debate as to whether or not it was justified in doing so.
(It's worth being aware that NK sees its legitimacy as stemming from the relationship between its leaders, as well as the early leaders of South Korea, had with the Japanese occupiers who ruled all of Korea from 1910 to when the Japanese finally caved in in 1945. Kim Il Sung, while undoubtedly a brutal figure once he came to power, was also a leading figure in he resistance to Japanese occupation. Meanwhile, the leadership that was installed in the South, following the partition of the Korean Peninsular, was dominated by people who had collaborated with the Japanese).
Something I'm not sure about, and would be curious if anyone can clear up –*has NK threatened a 'first use' of its nuclear capability? Or have its threats been about what would happen if it were invaded?
You have said that Britain, France, Russia, China, and the US are 'benign' –*though they've invaded hundreds of territories between them.
Either justify this, or stop typing.
They are - or else the US would be invading Mexico, the UK or France would be invading Spain and China would be invading Japan, the point is the nuclear powers have NOT used their nuclear arsenal to invade their neighbours, could the same be said of North Korea? Are you confident they won't use their nuclear capabilities (if/when they get it) to invade South Korea? Unlike you, I am not so sure, they are no where near as benign as the nuclear powers that have existed before them. If you STILL fail to understand, then I am at a loss!
I see the point Mr Porridge is making. I think a more important way of looking at it in a nuclear context is that NK is the only nuclear-armed state that is, in no uncertain terms, regularly threatening to use its nuclear weapons to wipe out other countries. It may just be rhetoric, but in the Mexican standoff that is nuclear diplomacy, it is very dangerous.
This EXACTLY, but try getting this across to Mr Porridge, because he is having difficulty in grasping what I am saying.
This EXACTLY, but try getting this across to Mr Porridge, because he is having difficulty in grasping what I am saying.
The problem you have is that you made a claim you can't support. If I go to the local school and murder several children, I can't claim to be innocent just because I haven't also torched my neighbour's house.
I've never said that NK is an innocent or even a nice country. I have said that it has a minimal record of overseas aggression in comparison to the major powers. I still challenge you to deny that.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
