Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 41 to 51 of 51
  1. #41  
    Quote Originally Posted by daThomas View Post
    Honestly, there is no fear in NK. You can ask any military expert, the US would be hard pressed to invade NK at peak much less with most of it's military in Iraq.
    I've read a lot on North Korean security. Honestly, there's plenty of fear.

    There's been no real chance of a US military invasion for the past decade, at least. Plans get drawn up, but the potential casualties and destruction in Seoul make it completely infeasible. Iraq changed nothing, really. Nevertheless, the North lives in continual fear of a first strike from the US. That's the primary reason for its nuclear program, its missile program, and its million-man army. That's the reason for it's constant bluster. That's the reason it's been asking for years for a mutual non-aggression pact with the US. And that's the reason that they're willing to give up their nuclear program in response to US offers for a permanent peace treaty.


    If the policy of this admin for Iran is regime change, they sure are going about it in an odd manner. Removing two of it's regional enemies (Iraq/Afghanistan) while at the same time discouraging the moderate voice due to an outside invasion of an arab country, and basically handing the southers resources over to a pro-iranian gov't.
    Well, they've proven their incompetence many times. This should be no surprise.
  2.    #42  
    Quote Originally Posted by samkim View Post
    I've read a lot on North Korean security. Honestly, there's plenty of fear.

    There's been no real chance of a US military invasion for the past decade, at least. Plans get drawn up, but the potential casualties and destruction in Seoul make it completely infeasible. Iraq changed nothing, really. Nevertheless, the North lives in continual fear of a first strike from the US. That's the primary reason for its nuclear program, its missile program, and its million-man army. That's the reason for it's constant bluster. That's the reason it's been asking for years for a mutual non-aggression pact with the US. And that's the reason that they're willing to give up their nuclear program in response to US offers for a permanent peace treaty.
    I don't think they'll give upi their nuke program completely. I think they'll sign deals not to trade in nuclear technology in exchange for aid.
  3. #43  
    We'll know soon how serious it is about giving up its nuclear program. They have to begin the process in a couple months. So far, signs look surprisingly good. But then, they've reneged many times before.

    Giving up existing nuclear weapons is another matter. That'll take getting over some serious trust issues.

    EDIT: er, two months from the agreement date, which is in a few weeks.
    Last edited by samkim; 03/20/2007 at 04:56 PM.
  4. #44  
    Here's a quote from Yukio Okamato, a Japanese advisor to the PM:
    "North Korea knows that the United States has never attacked a country with nuclear weapons...so it is their ultimate guarantee of safety."
  5. #45  
    Lol
  6. #46  
    Samkin, what's so funny?
  7. #47  
    I thought it was funny how that statement was ambiguously worded... It could mean that we've never attacked a country that posessed nuclear weapons, or it could be a sarcastic allusion to the fact that we're the only country to have attacked a country using nuclear weapons. I think both facts weigh heavily on the minds of the North Koreans. It's especially meaningful coming from a Japanese.


    As you think about the mindset of North Korea, keep in mind how scared we were of the Soviet Union throughout the cold war, despite our overwhelming nuclear deterrent. And think about Israel's existential paranoia in the face of potential nuclear programs in Iraq (a decade ago) and Iran, despite its own nuclear deterrent. It's only conjecture that NK could reach the US with a missile, and it's conceivable that we could wipe out Pyongyang with nuclear missiles launched from an offshore sub within minutes - before they even have a chance to react. Just as Ahmedinejad has talked about wiping Israel off the face of the earth, we've made it very clear that we'd like to eliminate Kim Jong Il's regime. Their deterrent is that they may be able to wipe out Seoul in response to a conventional weapons attack from the US, but that doesn't make them feel safe.
  8. #48  
    The bombs dropped in 1945 were generally known as atomic (fission), not the type generally known as nuclear (fusion), which are dramatically more powerful.

    I do see your poInt, however.
  9. #49  
    Quote Originally Posted by sblanter View Post
    The bombs dropped in 1945 were generally known as atomic (fission), not the type generally known as nuclear (fusion), which are dramatically more powerful.
    Hmm. I think atomic is a subset of nuclear.
  10. #50  
    Yeah. That's kinda why I said "generally known as".

    But I guess if he wasn't being sarcastic, and meant the US hasn't attacked with nuclear weapons . . .
  11. #51  
    Yeah, probably.
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Posting Permissions