 |
| |
|
|
MichaeltheGreat
|
|
Apolyton Grand Executioner
|
 |
mooning the house that Ruth built.
Oct 1999
time: 21:24
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by chegitz guevara
There is still a somewhat "strong," i.e., well-financed, fascist "movement" in Japan, mainly composed of old guardists and yakuza and the like. AFAIK, main stream Japanese think of them as kooks, dangerous thugs, but kooks nonetheless. |
The uyoku groups comprise about half a percent at most of the population, but there's no single movement - rather, some different types with a few threads of common ground. Yakuza are pretty apolitical, but sometimes they and the uyoku groups have common smuggling or commerce interests.
Even among the right-wing nationalists, and pro-militant types, nuclear capability is a taboo subject - it might well be on their agenda if they ever took control (they won't), but it's one of the few things they could openly say that would prompt enough popular outrage to force the government to crack down and break some heads. People mostly want to look the other way, while the loonies die off (they don't get many young followers) and eventually go away.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Kontiki
|
|
Canada
Aug 2001
time: 00:24
|
|
You can also look at Canada as an example of a capable but entirely unwilling nuclear power. IIRC, we had the option of being a nuclear power post-WWII, but declined. We more than have the money, the technical know-how and the nuclear plants to do it. We're about as likely as the Japanese to go through with it, though.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Drake Tungsten
|
 |
Knee deep in alien womyn...
Oct 2001
time: 14:24
|
|
quote:
What will they really do? Invade the South? Like they can afford to do that when they import 75% of their food and 95% of their energy. |
The problem is that North Korea can't afford to just sit around and languish anymore either. Their economy has been in desperate straits for a long time, which has backed them into a corner. They desperately need money, but Kim Jong Il isn't willing to make the sort of changes that are necessary to become part of the world community. He wants to maintain his grip on power, so he is trying to gain the money his country needs while maintaining his military and control over the populace. The nuclear program is just the latest way of going about this.
The nuke program allows Kim to blackmail Western governments into providing aid for North Korea. If this doesn't work, Kim can sell the nuclear technology (along with ballistic missile technology) to outside parties and make money that way. The North Koreans don't have nuclear weapons just for deterrence; they also provide a great bargaining chip in negotiations and a new lease on life for Kim Jong Il's regime.
If the US pushes too hard to take this away, who knows what the hell could happen? If North Korea didn't have nukes, what options would they have to obtain cash? They're not going to make huge economic reforms while Kim is in power, so they're really out of luck. With no hope for the future, can we say that Kim might not be tempted to attack South? From all indications he is not a rational man to begin with, so the slight chance of a successful invasion of the South may seem like a good idea to Kim. Hell, he might just want to go out in a blaze of glory. We don't know what he's thinking and there are few real checks on his power.
All in all, the whole situation is a huge mess. Throw in the competing interests of the United States, China, Japan and South Korea and the whole thing becomes damn near impossible to analyze. I don't know what's going to happen, but the possibility of things going extraordinarily bad does exist.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
mindseye
|
 |
A Yankee living in Shanghai
Apr 1999
time: 13:24
|
|
quote:
Convicted child molesters would have a brighter political future than anyone who proposed developing a nuclear force.
(...)
Even among the right-wing nationalists, and pro-militant types, nuclear capability is a taboo subject |
Mtg, are you not aware that last year the leader of the Japanese Liberal Party suggested this very thing? Although there was quite a strong negative reaction to the suggestion, it was revealing that the idea was spoken of publicly by so high a party official.
quote:
China has no real interest in yanking the DPRK's chain |
... and in fact has a strong interest in the contrary. If there is any sort of political break-down in North Korea, the steady flow of North Koreans already illegally entering China could turn into a tidal wave. Given the social unrest already simmering in China's northeast, China is not much interested in any idea that is accompanied by risk of chaos in North Korea.
Last edited by mindseye on 07-01-2003 at 17:48
|
|
| |
|
|
|
HershOstropoler
|
|
Dan:
"Kim Jong Il can't rule any of our options in or out."
I think he can. Despite the rhetoric the US can only go after relatively soft targets like iraq. It would take a lot to get the US to suffer the losses from a war with NK. So that option is out.
"China's going to have to help bring out the trash sooner or later."
Well they see the US rather than NK as the trash they want to bring out of their backyard.....
|
|
| |
|
|
|
MichaeltheGreat
|
|
Apolyton Grand Executioner
|
|
mooning the house that Ruth built.
Oct 1999
time: 21:24
|
|
Seems to me you guys are thinking too much from an American perspective, and assume the PRC is.
We are rivals to the PRC's long term geopolitical plans, the DPRK isn't. The nukes in North Korea won't be pointed at Beijing. Even rabid pit bulls tend not to bite the hand that feeds. 
Dino - NK is a nice proxy, that the PRC can pay lip service to trying to reign in, while it exerts a disproportionate diversion on US plans, especially in Asia. I can see the PRC leadership having to struggle to maintain a straight face, while they play this both ways.
Nobody wants the **** to really hit the fan, but disruption/diversion of US policy goals while the PRC leadership washes it's hands publicly can't be all bad.
Dan - a tarbaby, yes, but I like the pit bull analogy better. The PRC can't really get in our face directly, but they have no interest in letting the rest of the world become happy lackeys of the Yankee Imperialist Aggressorstm. So having that pit bull on the loose, as long as they keep the frothing mouth pointed in the right direction, is convenient. And if the pit bull was ever so dumb as to point the wrong way, they could handle that quickly and easily.
China wants to be, is becoming, and will be a major global power. I don't think they see the best way to do that as being our boys and helping carry out American policy interests, unless we offer them something really juicy.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Arrian
|
 |
Kneel before Grog!
Jul 2001
time: 00:24
|
|
I don't think other countries necessarily view proliferation the way we do. I'm not at all sure of the following, but here is one way to look at things:
First, from a psychological perspective, we had nukes first, and it spread from there. We've always had an interest in stopping/slowing the spread of nuclear weapons.
Second, though this might change with time, China has fundamentally different security concerns and goals than us. Our game is power projection. The foil to that is nukes. Exhibit A is NK. China doesn't really project much power at this point, and probably won't for some time yet. Nukes simply don't cramp their style as much.
Unless China gets into the game of sending troops around the world getting into other people's business (like us), other people having nukes isn't nearly as big a concern for them. Sure, it's a concern, but it's not at the same level.
-Arrian
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:24.
Apolyton Time is 00:24. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
07-01-2003 07:31
Seriously, the argument is framed in terms of extending routine maritime patrol in international waters, ostensibly to help in interdicting terrorists, etc. It's a way to get Bush off their ass, without saying "no, we can't" but without doing anything substantial. It's not like the Iraqis or anyone else there has a navy woth speaking of.
|