North Korea fires 2nd nuclear missle.....

Ja'far wrote:

Lucas McCain wrote:

Even if you used your nuke to retaliate it's still offensive.. A defensive weapon would be a Patriot type system that destroys incoming offensive weapons... I see your point though, but you need enough nukes to wipe out a whole country before it to work defensively.. Not just one or two.

So far the mere nominal possession of nuclear weapon has provided defense. Have two nuclear powers ever gone to war with one another?

As to the questions at hand, keeping these weapons from North Korea is a goal worth achieving, but it is one that can only be achieved diplomatically. Certainly, we have the military ability to stop them, but that would only give them grounds to use it.

That is the way I see it, too. Saber-rattling would seem to me to make them only MORE determined to develop nuclear weapons.

Ja'far wrote:

So far the mere nominal possession of nuclear weapon has provided defense. Have two nuclear powers ever gone to war with one another?

As to the questions at hand, keeping these weapons from North Korea is a goal worth achieving, but it is one that can only be achieved diplomatically. Certainly, we have the military ability to stop them, but that would only give them grounds to use it.

While I'm in agreement with you about diplomacy, what do we do if diplomacy fails? I'm afraid that with the likes of Kim Jong-il, diplomacy won't work. I hope I'm wrong.

I'd love to settle the matter diplomatically.. Maybe it has, but I don't remember it ever happening in a case like this.. Diplomacy hasn't worked for Iraq, Iran, the PLO, Homas , Bin Ladin,etc.

Judge Roy Bean wrote:

While I'm in agreement with you about diplomacy, what do we do if diplomacy fails? I'm afraid that with the likes of Kim Jong-il, diplomacy won't work. I hope I'm wrong.

That depends on the costs we are willing to pay, I suppose.

Judge Roy Bean wrote:

While I'm in agreement with you about diplomacy, what do we do if diplomacy fails? I'm afraid that with the likes of Kim Jong-il, diplomacy won't work. I hope I'm wrong.

Annie Oakley wrote:

I hesitate to ask bring this up, because I really want to discuss this and not be attacked, but I'll be brave, I guess, and try.

What right do we have to tell countries that are not in any way under our control that they can't have nuclear weapons, particularly for defense?

I know that Jong is felt by many to be "a loose cannon" (I'm not debating that), but do we look at all of our "enemies" as not having the right to have nuclear weapons?

With the US being the only country to ever use nuclear weapons against others, doesn't this seem particularly questionable of us to not allow other countries weapons for defense.

That's the same thought I have always had. Why do we have the right but other countries don't. It's a double standard even if he is a nut.

gringaloca wrote:

That's the same thought I have always had. Why do we have the right but other countries don't. It's a double standard even if he is a nut.

Who will take the lead if not us?

Judge Roy Bean wrote:

gringaloca wrote:

That's the same thought I have always had. Why do we have the right but other countries don't. It's a double standard even if he is a nut.

Who will take the lead if not us?

Why does there have to be a leader?

gringaloca wrote:

Why does there have to be a leader?

Because if no one is, nothing will stop rogue nations from getting nukes. That would be disastrous.

gringaloca wrote:

Judge Roy Bean wrote:

gringaloca wrote:

That's the same thought I have always had. Why do we have the right but other countries don't. It's a double standard even if he is a nut.

Who will take the lead if not us?

Why does there have to be a leader?

Great idea.. Lets just allow any idiot to have a bomb.. Better yet, just let them poor terrorist have some bombs for the way we treated them..

Lucas McCain wrote:

gringaloca wrote:

Judge Roy Bean wrote:

gringaloca wrote:

That's the same thought I have always had. Why do we have the right but other countries don't. It's a double standard even if he is a nut.

Who will take the lead if not us?

Why does there have to be a leader?

Great idea.. Lets just allow any idiot to have a bomb.. Better yet, just let them poor terrorist have some bombs for the way we treated them..

You are really getting out of line about putting words in my mouth. I don't want any idiots to have access to nukes. That's just you being obtuse again. And why do you keep referring to the terrorists as poor? Do you feel sorry for them? I don't. I can't believe you love the terrorists so much, that's just plain un-American.

Lay off the personal attacks. If not, this thread is over.

gringaloca wrote:

Lucas McCain wrote:

gringaloca wrote:

Judge Roy Bean wrote:

gringaloca wrote:

That's the same thought I have always had. Why do we have the right but other countries don't. It's a double standard even if he is a nut.

Who will take the lead if not us?

Why does there have to be a leader?

Great idea.. Lets just allow any idiot to have a bomb.. Better yet, just let them poor terrorist have some bombs for the way we treated them..

You are really getting out of line about putting words in my mouth. I don't want any idiots to have access to nukes. That's just you being obtuse again. And why do you keep referring to the terrorists as poor? Do you feel sorry for them? I don't. I can't believe you love the terrorists so much, that's just plain un-American.

You felt awful sorry for the terrorist in the water boarding threads... Another flip-flop...

Maybe it's time for a new "North Korea" thread. Hopefully that one won't be full of personal attacks and will instead discuss the issues.