Current Events > North Korea can produce a nuke every 6-7 weeks

(+) Yeah! (+)

Danger_Close posted...

QuantumScript posted...

They aren't interested in protecting themselves. They have no need to protect themselves. Nations have largely ignored them. They want weapons because they want their saber rattling to be much more than saber rattling.

You're probably right. But they still have the right to develop nuclear technology, same as anyone else. You may not like it, hell, I don't like it, but that's how it is. The only alternative is to restart the Korean war and if you do that, you're handing over Asia to China, because it'll be seen as the US starting yet another war in someone else's backyard, and leaving them to deal with 25 million refugees.

There is no right to develop nuclear technology. Especially not when you're a dictatorship that starves your own citizens and that tries to start shit with your immediate neighbors and the world's super powers. The right solution is to team up with China, and ideally to have China lead, on an effort to reduce North Korea's nuclear capabilities. At least until North Korea is no longer under this hellish regime.

If it was like South Korea, that'd be a different story. I could agree to allowing them nuclear weapons only if they were a civilized nation that wasn't starting shit every week. (Even then I'm skeptical because I think we should get rid of nukes.)

You know what happens to Seoul as soon as America attacks?

...Nothing?
---

Gravityfare posted...

...Nothing?

An unpredictable amount of civilian deaths from artillery.
---

toptopmax posted...

QuantumScript posted...

Team up with China to eliminate North Korea's ability to create nuclear weapons. Bombing the facilities they use to produce them would be a good start.

...

Which is war. You know what happens to Seoul as soon as America attacks? The least bloodiest solution to this will probably have to fall on China alone.

You can call a joint bombing mission a war if you'd like, but it's certainly not boots on the ground or a long campaign.

Source on what will happen to Seoul if America and/or China destroys North Korea's nuclear production capabilities?

QuantumScript posted...

I could agree to allowing them nuclear weapons only if they were a civilized nation that wasn't starting shit every week.

Who decides what counts as "starting shit every week?"
---

So you think the US is some grand arbiter of technology, dictating to others what they are and aren't allowed to have? Are you fucking serious? You attack NK for having a nuclear program and suddenly every tinpot dictator out there is going to be rushing for them. You might stop a dozen or 2, but you can't get them all and suddenly the world is a much more dangerous place.
---

Antifar posted...

QuantumScript posted...

I could agree to allowing them nuclear weapons only if they were a civilized nation that wasn't starting shit every week.

Who decides what counts as "starting shit every week?"

You argue just to hear yourself talk. Shut the hell up, lol.
---

Remember: Spending tax money on healthcare and programs that could help Americans is stupid and wrong, but spending it on trying to bomb the evil out of the world is fiscally sound.
---

QuantumScript posted...

toptopmax posted...

QuantumScript posted...

Team up with China to eliminate North Korea's ability to create nuclear weapons. Bombing the facilities they use to produce them would be a good start.

...

Which is war. You know what happens to Seoul as soon as America attacks? The least bloodiest solution to this will probably have to fall on China alone.

You can call a joint bombing mission a war if you'd like, but it's certainly not boots on the ground or a long campaign.

Source on what will happen to Seoul if America and/or China destroys North Korea's nuclear production capabilities?

http://nationalinterest.org/feature/5-north-korean-weapons-south-korea-should-fear-14825

When you have all that artillery aimed at a city....its pretty much their last act of spite if America attacks. Do as much damage to a major ally if they can.

Nobody actually knows how much damage they can do. Its hotly contested.

But if we end up fucking South Korea up we had damn be sure we are taking in refugees from the south or we are officially the bad guys.
---

So you think the US is some grand arbiter of technology, dictating to others what they are and aren't allowed to have?

Yes, have I not made the clear in this topic?

It's nuclear goddamn weapons. As in, one goes off and it's over 100,000 people easy. One goes off in a city like LA, it's millions dead and an economic meltdown.

Once you grow up and see the world as a real place and not some dreamland where "lalala everyone should have the right to cast fiery destruction on hundreds of thousands of civilians!" you'll realize that, yes, the good guys get to be the ones in charge of who gets nukes and who doesn't.
---

hockeybub89 posted...

Remember: Spending tax money on healthcare and programs that could help Americans is stupid and wrong, but spending it on trying to bomb the evil out of the world is fiscally sound.

We already have the weapons and planes and fuel to do everything being argued in this topic.
---

toptopmax posted...

QuantumScript posted...

toptopmax posted...

QuantumScript posted...

Team up with China to eliminate North Korea's ability to create nuclear weapons. Bombing the facilities they use to produce them would be a good start.

...

Which is war. You know what happens to Seoul as soon as America attacks? The least bloodiest solution to this will probably have to fall on China alone.

You can call a joint bombing mission a war if you'd like, but it's certainly not boots on the ground or a long campaign.

Source on what will happen to Seoul if America and/or China destroys North Korea's nuclear production capabilities?

http://nationalinterest.org/feature/5-north-korean-weapons-south-korea-should-fear-14825

When you have all that artillery aimed at a city....its pretty much their last act of spite if America attacks. Do as much damage to a major ally if they can.

Nobody actually knows how much damage they can do. Its hotly contested.

But if we end up fucking South Korea up we had damn be sure we are taking in refugees from the south or we are officially the bad guys.

It's just funny that people can sound off on what to do in Korea when they have absolutely no idea what's actually at stake.

toptopmax posted...

we are officially the bad guys.

have been for a while
---

When you have all that artillery aimed at a city

Dude, those weapons wouldn't do anything lmao. They can't even get basic rockets to fire off the ground.
---

Gravityfare posted...

So you think the US is some grand arbiter of technology, dictating to others what they are and aren't allowed to have?

Yes, have I not made the clear in this topic?

It's nuclear goddamn weapons. As in, one goes off and it's over 100,000 people easy. One goes off in a city like LA, it's millions dead and an economic meltdown.

Once you grow up and see the world as a real place and not some dreamland where "lalala everyone should have the right to cast fiery destruction on hundreds of thousands of civilians!" you'll realize that, yes, the good guys get to be the ones in charge of who gets nukes and who doesn't.

Hard to argue we're the good guys when we have flouted international law for... well, too long to even keep track. You don't get to enforce laws and standards as you exempt you and your friends from them and attack people on the basis that they "might" attack you "someday"

Danger_Close posted...

So you think the US is some grand arbiter of technology, dictating to others what they are and aren't allowed to have? Are you fucking serious? You attack NK for having a nuclear program and suddenly every tinpot dictator out there is going to be rushing for them. You might stop a dozen or 2, but you can't get them all and suddenly the world is a much more dangerous place.

It feels like you aren't putting any effort into understanding anything besides your own position. The US is not some grand arbiter of technology. I never said that it is. There's a huge difference in thinking that the US is an arbiter of technology...and not wanting North Korea to have long range nuclear weapons. If you can't understand that difference (or are unwilling to understand it) then perhaps we should just agree to disagree and end our exchange here.

Hard to argue we're the good guys when we have flouted international law for... wel

Okay, just to refocus: The good guys are the ones not flying planes into buildings and chemical gassing children.
---

Stop trolling gravity fare. Seoul has 25 million people when you consider its suburbs.

Its twice as dense as NYC.

They did this to a fairly unpopulated island with artillery years ago.
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2010/11/24/world/24koreaspan-cnd/24koreaspan-cnd-articleLarge.jpg

This is potentially the biggest disaster to humanity since WWII. And considering how fasy it could happen...

It might make the Holocaust look like a picnic
---

Gravityfare posted...

Hard to argue we're the good guys when we have flouted international law for... wel

Okay, just to refocus: The good guys are the ones not flying planes into buildings and chemical gassing children.

Bombing pharmaceutical plants and terrorizing the sky with drones is much better?

You know what else would make the Holocaust look like a picnic? If North Korea had long-range nuclear weapons and launched them on Seoul, Tokyo, and American cities.

I'm just saying. If you keep this warmongering up, please be open to the possibility that you may have to take in millions of refugees from SK.
---

QuantumScript posted...

You know what else would make the Holocaust look like a picnic? If North Korea had long-range nuclear weapons and launched them on Seoul, Tokyo, and American cities.

Both are bad. I agree in the long run NK needs to die.
---

wah_wah_wah posted...

Gravityfare posted...

Hard to argue we're the good guys when we have flouted international law for... wel

Okay, just to refocus: The good guys are the ones not flying planes into buildings and chemical gassing children.

Bombing pharmaceutical plants and terrorizing the sky with drones is much better?

Those are all terrible things, but it's definitely worse to fly planes into buildings and gas children. Collateral damage during warfare is awful but not comparable to the deliberate and calculated attacks you mentioned.

toptopmax posted...

I'm just saying. If you keep this warmongering up, please be open to possibility that you may have to take in millions of refugees from SK.

I am certainly in favor of taking in as many of them as we can, especially since other countries that have a vested interest in eliminating North Korea could do so as well.

I would hope that it doesn't come to that, though.

toptopmax posted...

QuantumScript posted...

You know what else would make the Holocaust look like a picnic? If North Korea had long-range nuclear weapons and launched them on Seoul, Tokyo, and American cities.

Both are bad. I agree in the long run NK needs to die.

I don't know. It's not easy. But what's worse? A possible conflict between the north and the south now...or a larger conflict in the future where North Korea launches nuclear weapons?

QuantumScript posted...

A possible conflict between the north and the south now...or a larger conflict in the future where North Korea launches nuclear weapons?

I think the first is a lot more possible than the second.
---

QuantumScript posted...

wah_wah_wah posted...

Gravityfare posted...

Hard to argue we're the good guys when we have flouted international law for... wel

Okay, just to refocus: The good guys are the ones not flying planes into buildings and chemical gassing children.

Bombing pharmaceutical plants and terrorizing the sky with drones is much better?

Those are all terrible things, but it's definitely worse to fly planes into buildings and gas children. Collateral damage during warfare is awful but not comparable to the deliberate and calculated attacks you mentioned.

It's worse because your team is not doing it. Whether a kid died from gas or from a drone is irrelevant. The kid isn't coming back either way. But they're "deliberate" and "calculated".... god that's the most nauseating language I've ever heard to refer to the deaths of kids.

Antifar posted...

QuantumScript posted...

A possible conflict between the north and the south now...or a larger conflict in the future where North Korea launches nuclear weapons?

I think the first is a lot more possible than the second.

They have nuclear weapons already. And they're making progress in developing long range ballistic missiles. Your entire perspective on the situation is at best laughably naive (like all your views) and at worst extremely dangerous.

QuantumScript posted...

I don't know. It's not easy. But what's worse? A possible conflict between the north and the south now...or a larger conflict in the future where North Korea launches nuclear weapons?

The latter might cause the end of the world. MAD. The former might just be the worst disaster the world has seen in decades.

It might not be as bad as I am saying, but remember we thought Iraq would be over in months.
---

wah_wah_wah posted...

QuantumScript posted...

wah_wah_wah posted...

Gravityfare posted...

Hard to argue we're the good guys when we have flouted international law for... wel

Okay, just to refocus: The good guys are the ones not flying planes into buildings and chemical gassing children.

Bombing pharmaceutical plants and terrorizing the sky with drones is much better?

Those are all terrible things, but it's definitely worse to fly planes into buildings and gas children. Collateral damage during warfare is awful but not comparable to the deliberate and calculated attacks you mentioned.

It's worse because your team is not doing it. Whether a kid died from gas or from a drone is irrelevant. The kid isn't coming back either way. But they're "deliberate" and "calculated".... god that's the most nauseating language I've ever heard to refer to the deaths of kids.

No, it's worse because collateral damage is an accident of taking out dangerous high-profile targets. Whereas flying planes into buildings and gassing children is a deliberate act of war and terror. The civilized world understands the difference. It's 2017, it's time for you to understand it too.

QuantumScript posted...

They have nuclear weapons already.

Correct. They have done nothing with them.

Your position contends that they will just...change this strategy one day, instead of doing what they've always done.
---

toptopmax posted...

QuantumScript posted...

I don't know. It's not easy. But what's worse? A possible conflict between the north and the south now...or a larger conflict in the future where North Korea launches nuclear weapons?

The latter might cause the end of the world. MAD. The former might just be the worst disaster the world has seen in decades.

It might not be as bad as I am saying, but remember we thought Iraq would be over in months.

I think everyone would rather have the former than the latter. As horrifying as it would be, I'd rather North Korea goes away now rather than later when they can take down everyone else with them.

Is Antifar really arguing for NK to have nuclear weapons rite nao
---

QuantumScript posted...

Antifar posted...

QuantumScript posted...

A possible conflict between the north and the south now...or a larger conflict in the future where North Korea launches nuclear weapons?

I think the first is a lot more possible than the second.

They have nuclear weapons already. And they're making progress in developing long range ballistic missiles. Your entire perspective on the situation is at best laughably naive (like all your views) and at worst extremely dangerous.

The whole reason they would even nukes would be to prevent an invasion of themselves. With your rhetoric and the rhetoric of the administration you are needlessly escalating the conflict - not taking any steps away. There is no reason North Korea would nuke us, because it would basically be suicide. North Korea is whacky but they aren't in need of yellow ribbon. They do what they do in order to prevent our attack. Not to launch an attack on us which they couldn't possibly win and will end in their own deaths.

Antifar posted...

QuantumScript posted...

They have nuclear weapons already.

Correct. They have done nothing with them.

Your position contends that they will just...change this strategy one day, instead of doing what they've always done.

They can't do anything with them until they develop long-range capabilities. Which they're getting close to developing. And my position is based on what they've said and threatened. It's pretty simple. Your input is pretty pointless. Do you have anything of substance to say?

Monday posted...

Is Antifar really arguing for NK to have nuclear weapons rite nao

My argument is that they already have nuclear weapons. What they don't have is the desire to use them given the response that would generate.
---

QuantumScript posted...

hey can't do anything with them until they develop long-range capabilities.

They don't need long-range capabilities to hit Seoul.
---

I can understand not wanting others to have nukes, but what are you going to do? Force them to stop? How? Force? That just encourages others to nuke up, and vindicates NK. Diplomacy? Doesn't seem to be working. NK and the rest of the world doesn't give 2 shits that the US doesn't want them to have nukes. The rest of the world would probably prefer the US outmatching them militarily so much that nukes are necessary for their defense, but the US doesn't give a shit about that either. Nobody really gives any more shits than absolutely necessary and will act in their own interests because that's what everyone else is doing.
---

QuantumScript posted...

wah_wah_wah posted...

QuantumScript posted...

wah_wah_wah posted...

Gravityfare posted...

Hard to argue we're the good guys when we have flouted international law for... wel

Okay, just to refocus: The good guys are the ones not flying planes into buildings and chemical gassing children.

Bombing pharmaceutical plants and terrorizing the sky with drones is much better?

Those are all terrible things, but it's definitely worse to fly planes into buildings and gas children. Collateral damage during warfare is awful but not comparable to the deliberate and calculated attacks you mentioned.

It's worse because your team is not doing it. Whether a kid died from gas or from a drone is irrelevant. The kid isn't coming back either way. But they're "deliberate" and "calculated".... god that's the most nauseating language I've ever heard to refer to the deaths of kids.

No, it's worse because collateral damage is an accident of taking out dangerous high-profile targets. Whereas flying planes into buildings and gassing children is a deliberate act of war and terror. The civilized world understands the difference. It's 2017, it's time for you to understand it too.

I'm sure the families of the kids will understand your shitty rationalizations of war crimes. "You know, we axed your kid, but hey it's more civilized, we meant well!" That'll go over well.

Monday posted...

Is Antifar really arguing for NK to have nuclear weapons rite nao

Yes he is.

wah_wah_wah posted...

QuantumScript posted...

Antifar posted...

QuantumScript posted...

A possible conflict between the north and the south now...or a larger conflict in the future where North Korea launches nuclear weapons?

I think the first is a lot more possible than the second.

They have nuclear weapons already. And they're making progress in developing long range ballistic missiles. Your entire perspective on the situation is at best laughably naive (like all your views) and at worst extremely dangerous.

The whole reason they would even nukes would be to prevent an invasion of themselves. With your rhetoric and the rhetoric of the administration you are needlessly escalating the conflict - not taking any steps away. There is no reason North Korea would nuke us, because it would basically be suicide. North Korea is whacky but they aren't in need of yellow ribbon. They do what they do in order to prevent our attack. Not to launch an attack on us which they couldn't possibly win and will end in their own deaths.

No it's not. No one has cared about North Korea for a long time now, yet they rattle their saber every year and try to aggravate the surrounding nations. They have never been at risk of an attack from America or China except as a consequence of their own saber rattling. Their claims that they're doing it for self defense is just their propaganda. They're a militaristic nation that wants to expand its influence. They don't hide that.

North Korea's "right" to not being invaded is not sufficient justification for their nuclear program.

QuantumScript posted...

They're a militaristic nation that wants to expand its influence.

I have some bad news for you about the US, Russia, Israel, China...
---

Antifar posted...

QuantumScript posted...

hey can't do anything with them until they develop long-range capabilities.

They don't need long-range capabilities to hit Seoul.

But they're obviously still developing long-range capabilities. Because they want to be able to obliterate Seoul, Tokyo, American cities, etc, with one strike rather than just Seoul with an artillery barrage that might not even get the job done.

wah_wah_wah posted...

I'm sure the families of the kids will understand your s***ty rationalizations of war crimes. "You know, we axed your kid, but hey it's more civilized, we meant well!" That'll go over well.

Like I said, every civilized nation understands the difference between collateral damage when you're taking out a high-profile target...and deliberate terrorism/crimes. If you don't want to understand that difference, that's on you.

Antifar posted...

QuantumScript posted...

They're a militaristic nation that wants to expand its influence.

I have some bad news for you about the US, Russia, Israel, China...

Your response is not an argument - it's just an edgelord attempt at one. Please provide arguments if you have them.

Antifar posted...

I have some bad news for you about the US, Russia, Israel, China...

None of those are as bad as NK. Russia and China at least give its regular citizens opportunity to an extent.
---

toptopmax posted...

Antifar posted...

I have some bad news for you about the US, Russia, Israel, China...

None of those are as bad as NK. Russia and China at least give its regular citizens opportunity to an extent.

Exactly. They're not the same thing at all. Antifar's lost his marbles.

QuantumScript posted...

No it's not. No one has cared about North Korea for a long time now, yet they rattle their saber every year and try to aggravate the surrounding nations.

Doesn't that lead any rational person to believe that they are not actually interested in launching a full scale war? I mean use your head here.

QuantumScript posted...

Their claims that they're doing it for self defense is just their propaganda. They're a militaristic nation that wants to expand its influence. They don't hide that.

Dude they're not suicidal. There's just no situation where North Korea is going to beat America. That is an insane view to have and not one that is borne out by any reading of the situation.

MabusIncarnate posted...

And they can launch each one a total distance of 20 yards.

I'd love to see them attempt to launch one and it fails and drops right back down on their dumb asses.

they'll just tie like 1000 of them together and have it so once the first one goes to its 20 yards, it will detatch and the next nuke in the chain will fire off going another 20 yards, and this'll keep going till it reachers its target
---

wah_wah_wah posted...

Doesn't that lead any rational person to believe that they are not actually interested in launching a full scale war? I mean use your head here.

No, it does not suggest that at all. And I don't think any of the surrounding nations want to risk finding out once North Korea has long range capabilities.

wah_wah_wah posted...

Dude they're not suicidal. There's just no situation where North Korea is going to beat America. That is an insane view to have and not one that is borne out by any reading of the situation.

I didn't say that they can beat America. They can't beat anyone. But with 1 long-range nuclear weapon being produced every 6 weeks once they have the capability...they can destabilize the entire planet. North Korea does not care about self preservation. The way they treat their own people and the way they antagonize other countries is evidence of that.

1 nuke hitting SF might basically end the western world. Say goodbye to Silicon Valley.
---

QuantumScript posted...

Like I said, every civilized nation understands the difference between collateral damage when you're taking out a high-profile target...and deliberate terrorism/crimes. If you don't want to understand that difference, that's on you.

Collateral damage is a euphemism. It's not collateral damage, it's a war crime and it flouts international law. It would be easier for us to be able to enforce a set of standards on the world if people like you didn't justify going into the countries of others and killing their kids as acceptable collateral damage.

Imagine if Iran flew to your neighborhood with a drone to target someone it thought MIGHT harm them someday and blew up your kids. Would you shrug and go "oopsie daisy collateral damage!"

Honestly, just nuke them. The stakes are way too high. Just fucking do it. China will be pissed as all fuck, but at least we won't all be dead.
---