Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: aldo_14 on October 03, 2006, 06:01:50 am
-
North Korea 'to conduct nuclear test' (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/5402018.stm)
Gentlmen, rattle your sabres!
-
WWIII....
-
WWIII....
I doubt that half-a-dozen nuclear-tipped missiles launched by NK at SK - all failing to either make the distance or detonate properly - followed shortly thereafter by the complete and total destruction of the Northern half of the Korean peninsula with 8-dozen American Trident IIs would really count as a "World War". :rolleyes:
Anyway, just another case of NK thumbing their noses at the US. Akin to the test-firing of thier missiles a few months ago, nothing will come of this. Get over it, people.
-
World War=word war!!! Not something between two states.
The first mondial war started after a murder,so...
-
Granted, but that situation was compounded by a freak of political chance calling several major powers into a conflict of which they were incapable or unwilling to back out. Correct me if i'm wrong, but I know of no nation ready to back up North Korea should they suddenly decide to act-out their thermonuclear fantasies on their southern neighbour.
If NK tries anything, the rest of the world is going to pull up a chair and watch the fireworks while the US goes Hiroshima on their asses.
-
The South Koreans might not be happy about this - fallout and all that business eh? I doubt they want their cancer rates spiking just in time for China to hit its economic peak.
-
World War=word war!!! Not something between two states.
The first mondial war started after a murder,so...
The first world war started as the result of a far more complex set of circumstances & factors than the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand.
-
North Korea already has nuclear weapons and the mean to deliver them to major South Korean cities, as well as Japan, China and Russia. That's why the whole issue of NK's nuclear program was quietly dropped from headlines recently: neither Bush nor anyone else is particularly eager to talk about what amounts to a ****ty, despotic third world nation thumbing its nose at the world's powers and getting away with it.
-
I somehow doubt they've got any pointed at China or Russia. Or even target data for Russia for that matter.
-
Personally I am a bit worried about the world right now. Alot of people have nukes now...more than ever before. It used to be fairly "easy" in world politics I think. The US and Soviets had nukes and a few of their allies did and nobody was quite crazy enough to use them post WWII (lets not start that). They had their coalitions and empires to protect and nuclear war was endgame for everyone. Take for instance that Russian fellow who refused to believe what the computers were telling him and refused to trigger a nuclear war. He saved the world.
Now you've got minor powers or countries with almost no conventional power at all that have nukes or are trying to build them in the interests of achieving whatever they want. Instead of the careful balancing act that we had during the cold war...anyone of those minor powers with nukes could be a major problem...they probably don't feel the same restrictions to use one. Some of them are desperate to do something...anything.
The comparison can be made to the start of WWI...but I think its better to look at the comparison to WWII. Depending on who you ask...World War II started in 1939, 1940, and 1941. But I think alot of historians say that you need to go back further. The real start of the war was in 1936 with the Spanish Civil War. Foreign powers were involved on either sides of the conflict...namely the Russians and the Germans (Soviets and Nazi's respectively) and the war was sort of a dull murmer compaired to what came later. So my concern is that we're at that dull murmer stage...the right sort of tipping point could take us into a much nastier scenario.
-
Why? What is possibly the worlds biggest and most powerful crime syndicate exists in Russia, the Russian Mafia. They have wide ranging influence and power, meaning if they dislike N Korea, Russia dislikes NK.
I somehow doubt they've got any pointed at China or Russia. Or even target data for Russia for that matter.
-
Nothing will come of it. NK is postering about so that they can get A) developed countries to "lay themselves at their feet" with all sorts of incentives not to do it, B) so that it support it's own ego with it's "mighty defeat of the tyrannical US", and C) so that somebody, somewhere will pay attention to them.
-
North Korea already has nuclear weapons and the mean to deliver them to major South Korean cities, as well as Japan, China and Russia. That's why the whole issue of NK's nuclear program was quietly dropped from headlines recently: neither Bush nor anyone else is particularly eager to talk about what amounts to a ****ty, despotic third world nation thumbing its nose at the world's powers and getting away with it.
There is zero proof of them actually having working nuclear weapons, but it's not impossible. However, no test detonations lately anywhere and before you detonate you can't really call yourself a nuclear power.
Is DPRK even partial to NPT anyways?
-
Another problem is that if their nuclear weapon works as well as that missile they test fired recently...I'll be surprised if it goes pop. Or...it goes pop and releases radiation everywhere. Great...thanks guys!
-
I think this is a big win for China. They can watch the US's reaction and take notes.
-
on what not to do?
-
On how to proceed in the future.
-
Pfft. I still have faith in Rods from God anyway...
-
Personally I am a bit worried about the world right now. Alot of people have nukes now...more than ever before. It used to be fairly "easy" in world politics I think. The US and Soviets had nukes and a few of their allies did and nobody was quite crazy enough to use them post WWII (lets not start that). They had their coalitions and empires to protect and nuclear war was endgame for everyone. Take for instance that Russian fellow who refused to believe what the computers were telling him and refused to trigger a nuclear war. He saved the world.
Now you've got minor powers or countries with almost no conventional power at all that have nukes or are trying to build them in the interests of achieving whatever they want. Instead of the careful balancing act that we had during the cold war...anyone of those minor powers with nukes could be a major problem...they probably don't feel the same restrictions to use one. Some of them are desperate to do something...anything.
The comparison can be made to the start of WWI...but I think its better to look at the comparison to WWII. Depending on who you ask...World War II started in 1939, 1940, and 1941. But I think alot of historians say that you need to go back further. The real start of the war was in 1936 with the Spanish Civil War. Foreign powers were involved on either sides of the conflict...namely the Russians and the Germans (Soviets and Nazi's respectively) and the war was sort of a dull murmer compaired to what came later. So my concern is that we're at that dull murmer stage...the right sort of tipping point could take us into a much nastier scenario.
Well, North Korea aside, I don't think anyone who is likely to have nukes is crazy enough to use them. Not even the laughable "Axis of Evil" is made up of cartoon villains and mad scientists. Name the worst despots you can: Iran, Syria, Libya, Saudi Arabia, Cuba, Burma - none are particularly keen on suicide or starting WW3. So nuclear proliferation isn't too much of an issue to my mind, as long as there are sufficient controls in place to ensure that the stockpiles belonging to nation-states are never under the control of few enough individuals to make it possible to give the nukes to real crazies, who would use them.
Pretty much no nation is likely to use nuclear weapons. Even most insurgent groups aren't that stupid. A nuclear-armed Hezbollah is not, I think, something intolerable. But like I said, there are notable exceptions. North Korea, who's leadership is just nuts. Maybe al-Queda (probably not the Taliban, though I wouldn't risk it). It takes a special degree of fanatacism to use nuclear weapons, fanatacism which the vast majority of people, regardless of their political convicitions simply do not posses.
North Korea the way I see it is like a poor, illiterate Nazi Germany, except given decades to achieve their indoctrination objectives and without the moderating influence of an educated, rational top leadership (meaning Hitler's immediate subordinates, not Hitler). The government is a wild card, and even so they still probably would never commit to using nuclear weapons. The greatest immediate danger is probably a coup in Pakistan during which some fringe Islamist groups would get their hands on Pakistan's nuclear arsenal. So Musharraf is a necessary evil, but he seems like a nice guy (see Daily Show)
-
On how to proceed in the future.
A: "Hey NK detonated"
B: "What did USA do"
A: "reacted"
B: "MOTHER OF GOD."
Elaborate here, what do you mean?
-
if theres a nukewar i can kiss my ass byebye cuz im not all that far away from moscow :(
-
North Korea 'to conduct nuclear test' (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/5402018.stm)
Gentlmen, rattle your sabres!
I'd have to see it to believe it........
-
Pfft. I still have faith in Rods from God anyway...
(http://www.thesimpsons.com/bios/images/bios_townspeople_rod.gif) ?
-
Well people like that are dense enough to drop from LEO as a weapon ;)
-
Can't they just play DEFCON instead?
-
I'm more concerned about Korea getting a Nuke than Iran, basically because the guy really is the sort of nutter who'd nuke South Korea in a fit of pique without provocation.
-
Can't they just play DEFCON instead?
Everybody dies.
-
Well, that'd be a showstopper of a bug if there ever was one...
-
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15152981/
I somehow don't think this is going to stop him. North Korea has nothing to lose.
-
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15152981/
I somehow don't think this is going to stop him. North Korea has nothing to lose.
Their power and state is what they have to lose. This kind of **** happens every single year, seriously - just read back the news stories. They always do some hard **** to blackmail more food and supplies for themselves, then stay quiet until everyone forgets about them and then they pull some stupid **** again.
They are the ADD kid of the world politics and weird remnant of times long gone by. I almost wish that they would just shoot eachother with big guns and WW2 weapons so we could finally get rid of these discussions.
-
It's getting tense...now I will be really watching this.
-
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/5415304.stm
Meep. Silly buggers.
-
All it'll take is one guy to get killed, on either side. Then all hell will break loose.
-
All it'll take is one guy to get killed, on either side. Then all hell will break loose.
Yep, and the UN'll unleash their wrath; they'll send them another strongly-worded letter.
-
If it's a South Korea man that gets killed, SK will go ape**** on NK and start rallying other countries for war.
If it's a North Korean man that gets killed, NK will go ****ing bananas and blow the **** out of anything that's even looking at them (or try to ast least).
-
I think South Korea is actually less trigger-happy than the US, because it's their ass on the line. They're the one who have always tried to strike the conciliatory tone, to go the peaceful route towards bringing NK in from the cold. North Korea has kidnapped South Koreans a bunch of times (remember Kim Jong Il kidnapping move stars to act in his movies?) and the South has never done **** about it.
-
It's a pressure valve, though. It just keeps building. At some point it's going to vent, and then all hell will break loose. You keep poking someone with a stick and eventually they come after you.
Besides, as deplorable as kidnapping is, death is viewed rather differently...
-
Their power and state is what they have to lose.
Their power over a group of starving people and a state that is one of the most dysfunctional in Asia?
-
Their power and state is what they have to lose.
Their power over a group of starving people that would die for them at any moment and a state who is at their very beck and call and that is one of the most dysfunctional in Asia?
Fixed.