 |
|
Dr Strangelove
|
|
If North Korea has the right to nokes then so does South Korea. I think we should secretly promise the North Koreans that we will give nuclear weapons to South Korea if they develop their own bomb.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Eli
|
|
Israel
Jul 2000 time: 07:23
|
|
quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara
IIRC, the Negev desert in Southern Israel. |
Errr, do you have a source for that? It's the first time I hear this claim.
AFAIK Carver is right, Israel tested it's nukes together with SA.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Gatekeeper
|
 |
United States of America
Feb 2000 time: 23:23
|
|
Y'know, for some freakin' strange reason, I guess I *trust* the likes of the United States, Britain, China and France to control their nuclear arsenals than I do the likes of, say, North Korea, Iran, Iraq, India and/or Pakistan. If the world's going to have nukes, better that they're under the thumb of democratic nations or, at the very least, stable nations (I'm thinking China here).
I'm sorry if it offends some folks, but I'd wager that the Indian subcontinent is a far more dangerous place today than it was 30 years ago. I'd wager that the likes of NK or Iraq would do something really, really stupid with whatever they have than the United States, Britain or France would do.
Hell, NK wants a non-aggression pact with the USA now! What does that mean? We pull our 30,000 troops out of South Korea? That, so long as NK doesn't attack America directly, we can't do jack **** about their little (or not-so-little) shenanigans?
Yep, the future looks so bright I gotta wear shades! (To protect my eyes from the flash of nudets.)
Gatekeeper
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
aahz_capone
|
 |
The Hague
Feb 2002 time: 06:23
|
|
NK can have nukes if they want to, I have no fear if they get them either. However, according to International Law they can't. Any country has a sovereignity which allows them to bare any arms except those disallowed by treaties they have signed. NK signed a treaty that said they would discontinue nuke research in return for aid from the US. It has yet to be proved whether they broke the agreement. In theory as long as no one finds out, they haven't broke it, and a sovereign country has a right to hold secrets. If they have them no one should fear their use.
No country in their right mind would dare use them for fear of MAD. The US would never first strike with them, nor would Russia, nor would NK. Especially nowadays, any country using them first, especially rogue countries, would be wiped of the map, because missiles can be traced back to point of origin. The fact that NK is developing missiles along side nukes shows that they are "safe" nukers.
A country like Iraq, only interested in nukes but not ICBM tech is dangerous because a car with nuke can't be traced and terrorism is hard to deflect. Iraq has signed a no-nuke treaty, after the Gulf war, which gives them no legal precedance to bare nukes.
Only sociopathic leaders would nuke and Saddam is a sociopath, but thats besides the point, because he gave up his nuke rights after the Gulf War. I'm talking International Law here, peeps, and that's what it boils down to no matter what Bush says. Basically it boils done to everyone has the right, NK (and Iraq) don't have the legal presidance to though.
I actully votd for banana, because it's everyone God-given right to bare banana and banana power is eco-friendly, anti-terror, pro-porn and financially viable.
Last edited by aahz_capone on 20-11-2002 at 17:14
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:23. Apolyton Time is 00:23. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|