North Korea - how serious should we take them?
Discussion
LaurasOtherHalf said:
Welshbeef said:
At what point do we send in the B52 bombers and bomb the s
t out of those Neuclear sites?
You honestly think that starting a nuclear conflict is wise?t out of those Neuclear sites?Biggest problem is Seoul. Hence why I believe it'll be China that puts them back in their box - they will not want a nutter on their border with a red button.
Wouldn't trust China as far as I could throw them. They've probably helped NK develop the technology. Beijing is the only place you can fly 'from' to land in NJ - says it all, they are buddies.
20 years ago NK couldn't build its own tractors - now they're testing ballistic missiles and nukes, and I'm sure it's not the NK education system that's responsible.
Somebody is helping them.
20 years ago NK couldn't build its own tractors - now they're testing ballistic missiles and nukes, and I'm sure it's not the NK education system that's responsible.
Somebody is helping them.
True, but all the signs are it's Iran. We've already seen that Iran are too isolated and surrounded by countries willing to take decisive action for their development programme to be unhindered.
The Chinese are buddies, in the sense that it serves their interests far more to have a dictatorial communist state on their border instead of a super dynamic capitalist one with strong links to the US.
They're not 'friends'. The cost to China is high, they're only paying it due to the benefits for them.
However, with nukes the relationship changes. At the moment, NK must effectively beg for help. With nukes, they can to an extent demand it. China does not give up control willingly to anyone. There is no benefit to China of a nuclear equipped NK...
After all, if China wanted NK to have nukes, they'd just give them some!
The Chinese are buddies, in the sense that it serves their interests far more to have a dictatorial communist state on their border instead of a super dynamic capitalist one with strong links to the US.
They're not 'friends'. The cost to China is high, they're only paying it due to the benefits for them.
However, with nukes the relationship changes. At the moment, NK must effectively beg for help. With nukes, they can to an extent demand it. China does not give up control willingly to anyone. There is no benefit to China of a nuclear equipped NK...
After all, if China wanted NK to have nukes, they'd just give them some!
Reports earlier this week that NK's missile test from submarines demonstrated it was Chinese technology - the missiles were identical to Chinese ones.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3774721/Is...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3774721/Is...
LaurasOtherHalf said:
Welshbeef said:
At what point do we send in the B52 bombers and bomb the st out of those Neuclear sites?
You honestly think that starting a nuclear conflict is wise?t out of those Neuclear sites?Welshbeef said:
LaurasOtherHalf said:
Welshbeef said:
At what point do we send in the B52 bombers and bomb the st out of those Neuclear sites?
You honestly think that starting a nuclear conflict is wise?t out of those Neuclear sites?The only resolution here involves China. And China is more and more concerned by their mad neighbour.
Welshbeef said:
Well we would have destroyed their Neuclear capability period. No need to use Neuclear against them just standard bombs to take out the facility.
Whilst captain yank is precision bombing the north's "neuclear" facilities, Seoul is on the receiving end of 500,000 rounds of artillery rounds an hour including chemical and biological warheads, so perhaps not such a smart idea!! VolvoT5 said:
I think the most disturbing thing about this is that NK probably has one of the very few leaders crazy enough to actually use a nuke.
Very disturbing development. Somehow they need to be slapped back down into place.
There a dichotomy, I that quite often the mental leader driving for nuke capability then becomes very sane once the effect of them having nukes becomes apparent. Very disturbing development. Somehow they need to be slapped back down into place.
No longer can their tantrums be ignored as localised, or unlikely to escalate. Every single time, the foremost consideration of the rest of the world is to prevent them going nuclear - if necessary via first strike.
That tends to have a very sobering effect on the most apparently mental of dictators.
Puggit said:
Welshbeef said:
LaurasOtherHalf said:
Welshbeef said:
At what point do we send in the B52 bombers and bomb the st out of those Neuclear sites?
You honestly think that starting a nuclear conflict is wise?t out of those Neuclear sites?The only resolution here involves China. And China is more and more concerned by their mad neighbour.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff