Will we face the very first nuclear war of the 21st century tomorrow?
#1
Posted 20 December 2010 - 06:01 AM
http://news.scotsman...arns.6658950.jp
So the question is...
Will this week, the world face its very first nuclear war?
#2
Posted 20 December 2010 - 06:02 AM
North Korean nukes can reach as far as California by estimation, no further. But the fact they're threatening nuclear war is bad, signals despration, fear or a lack of understanding.
Edited by Insurrection, 20 December 2010 - 06:14 AM.
#3
Posted 20 December 2010 - 10:14 PM
#4
Posted 20 December 2010 - 10:29 PM
#5
Posted 21 December 2010 - 03:43 AM
Will we see it war in our lifetime? In the next ten years? It pains me to say that it's quite possible. In the next few months? I think its still a war of words.
Edited by Zatren6, 21 December 2010 - 03:44 AM.
#6
Posted 21 December 2010 - 03:47 AM
#7
Posted 21 December 2010 - 06:46 AM
If it does turn into fallout I'm goin to Vegas.
But for you, you would have to wait for the insubordination from the US military, then two hundered and fifty years before you can do that. Might I suggest the vault where the experiment would be cryogenically freezing....I HAVE AN IDEA FOR A FALLOUT MOVIE!!!
Anyway, I'd give this Korea thing a month or so, see if North Korea attacks after getting what they want again.
Edited by Insurrection, 21 December 2010 - 06:48 AM.
#8
Posted 21 December 2010 - 11:46 PM
If it does turn into fallout I'm goin to Vegas.
But for you, you would have to wait for the insubordination from the US military, then two hundered and fifty years before you can do that. Might I suggest the vault where the experiment would be cryogenically freezing....I HAVE AN IDEA FOR A FALLOUT MOVIE!!!
Anyway, I'd give this Korea thing a month or so, see if North Korea attacks after getting what they want again.
I may have to take out one of my Zombie Plans earlier than i expected.
#9
Posted 22 December 2010 - 03:55 AM
*and I'd seen Fallout, not a good sight to see in the nearby future*
What's Happening with the Naruto series as of now!
#10
Posted 22 December 2010 - 04:05 AM
However, I would be damned if I would ever, ever use a nuclear weapon. These monstrosities of past human blips of intelligence
We might as well walk into it and get it over with. The sooner these weapons are outlawed and our nation penalized to the point of dismantlement, the better for the rest of the races of man-kind.
#11
Posted 28 December 2010 - 07:37 AM
Kim may be power hungry despotic ruler but he is not stupid. He nukes anything on America and that entire country is reduced to rubble and dust. We wouldn't bother with an Army. South Korea could clean up if it really wanted to.
#12
Posted 28 December 2010 - 03:06 PM
Three things:
1) I'm not sure he believes he has to actually nuke anyone to get what he wants. He may just believe that the threat is sufficient and will keep sabre rattling until someone does something about it.
2) Your scenario requires that he actually care that his country was reduced to dust. I don't think it's outside the relm of possibility that he doesn't care what happens to his people or if they get nuked. Look at the way he treats them now.
3) He would have to believe that the US or some other nation would actually retaliate in such a way if he didn't. There are plenty of reasons why he might believe they would not do so.
As far as the South cleaning up...you have to keep in mind that one reason the North getting nukes is such a big deal is that that can easily nuke or threaten to nuke Seoul. This was one of the big arguments for attempting to disarm him before he got such weapons. Even if they can't hit the U.S. they're ability to threaten the South with such an attack will make them think twice as well as any potential allies.
Second, they (along with the combined UN force) nearly did just that in the early stages of the Korean War, but were pushed back when the Chinese got involved. China seemed unhappy with the latest North Korean actions, but that doesn't guarantee the Chinese won't step up if the South invades. On the other hand, China could be a big deterrent to using them. If he uses them, would the Chinese conitnue to back him up in the wave of the backlash? The could just as easily say, you made your bed, now lie in it.
#13
Posted 28 December 2010 - 04:44 PM
(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻
#14
Posted 28 December 2010 - 08:08 PM
1. No thanks. I want a new Judge Dredd movie, though.
2. They can't change. Stop pushing hippie logic.
3. I like pie as a breakfast treat when it becomes critical that I have at least one piece before it goes bad in the garage.
#15
Posted 29 December 2010 - 01:03 AM
1) I'm not sure he believes he has to actually nuke anyone to get what he wants. He may just believe that the threat is sufficient and will keep sabre rattling until someone does something about it.
2) Your scenario requires that he actually care that his country was reduced to dust. I don't think it's outside the relm of possibility that he doesn't care what happens to his people or if they get nuked. Look at the way he treats them now.
3) He would have to believe that the US or some other nation would actually retaliate in such a way if he didn't. There are plenty of reasons why he might believe they would not do so.
As far as the South cleaning up...you have to keep in mind that one reason the North getting nukes is such a big deal is that that can easily nuke or threaten to nuke Seoul. This was one of the big arguments for attempting to disarm him before he got such weapons. Even if they can't hit the U.S. they're ability to threaten the South with such an attack will make them think twice as well as any potential allies.
Second, they (along with the combined UN force) nearly did just that in the early stages of the Korean War, but were pushed back when the Chinese got involved. China seemed unhappy with the latest North Korean actions, but that doesn't guarantee the Chinese won't step up if the South invades. On the other hand, China could be a big deterrent to using them. If he uses them, would the Chinese conitnue to back him up in the wave of the backlash? The could just as easily say, you made your bed, now lie in it.
1. I doubt he will either.
2. Can't rule what isn't there. He may not care but if there is no country to rule, then he loses what little power he does have.
3. It's possible. A nuclear attack on the west coast would kill millions, especially if it was in LA. Do you think there would be any tree hugging ideals in that regard? I don't think a nuclear response would happen, just because of our allies in SK and Japan. We wouldn't want them to feel the effects of the fall out but we do have non nuclear armaments that can take out an entire street block and a far superior air force along with our naval might.
Personally, I don't think China would get involved. It's not very good business sense for their country. They, despite the fact of a socialist government, have very much so embraced the current capitalist views ever since they integrated Hong Kong. To them, having us on their side, so we can continue to sell our debt and buy their products means more to them than some kitten hole country.
#16
Posted 29 December 2010 - 02:50 AM
My point was not so much about whether the US would or would not do that, but what Kim Jong Il believes the US will do. After all the anti-proliferation noise Obama has made I have trouble seeing him nuke NK even in retaliation when he likely has the fire power to bomb into oblivion using conventional arms. Given the potential for a trading of nukes and NK's proximity to China I have some difficulty seeing any administration using that in response if they believe conventional weapons will do the trick.
The Chinese are communist not socialist. And it's as you say, economically they want the growth the capitalism can bring, but haven't followed that up with political freedom.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users