- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Who cares if North Korea and Iran have nuclear weapons?
Posted on 5/22/18 at 2:50 am
Posted on 5/22/18 at 2:50 am
Trump should say, "Go ahead with your nuclear weapons, once you develop and have them, all of the U.S. Nuclear Arsenal will be pointed toward your whole country from here on out." I mean seriously, they only use it as leverage for money, etc. Let's take their leverage away. They know good damn well not to launch their shitty ICBM's. IS this logical or would this be dumb? It just seems like we are trying to stop the inevitable. Eventually, more and more developing nations will have them. We should be more concerned with counter-measures.
This post was edited on 5/22/18 at 2:53 am
23
Posted on 5/22/18 at 2:52 am to rivermonsters87
Yeah. NO!
Posted on 5/22/18 at 3:43 am to rivermonsters87
quote:
Who cares if North Korea and Iran have nuclear weapons?
dumbest question ever asked.
Posted on 5/22/18 at 3:55 am to rivermonsters87
Posted on 5/22/18 at 3:59 am to rivermonsters87
quote:
Who cares if North Korea and Iran have nuclear weapons?
Israel and AIPAC, and as a result, your elected "representatives".
Posted on 5/22/18 at 4:08 am to rivermonsters87
Really, man?
If Iran gets nukes ... suddenly Saudi wants nukes, now Turkey wants nukes, now Egypt wants nukes ... and then Israel is surrounded by nuclear countries.
If North Korea gets nukes ... now South Korea wants nukes, now Japan wants nukes.
Now everyone has nuclear weapons.
The chance of nuclear holocaust has just shot up 1,000,000 %.
If Iran gets nukes ... suddenly Saudi wants nukes, now Turkey wants nukes, now Egypt wants nukes ... and then Israel is surrounded by nuclear countries.
If North Korea gets nukes ... now South Korea wants nukes, now Japan wants nukes.
Now everyone has nuclear weapons.
The chance of nuclear holocaust has just shot up 1,000,000 %.
Posted on 5/22/18 at 4:13 am to Manzielathon
quote:
Really, man?
If Iran gets nukes ... suddenly Saudi wants nukes, now Turkey wants nukes, now Egypt wants nukes ... and then Israel is surrounded by nuclear countries.
If North Korea gets nukes ... now South Korea wants nukes, now Japan wants nukes.
Now everyone has nuclear weapons.
The chance of nuclear holocaust has just shot up 1,000,000 %.
Careful there - you just might engage some rusty cog in the mentally incompetent and cause a complete breakdown.
You are suggesting rational evaluation of facts, history, and events. Not in their repertoire of capability.
Posted on 5/22/18 at 4:22 am to Manzielathon
quote:
If Iran gets nukes ... suddenly Saudi wants nukes, now Turkey wants nukes, now Egypt wants nukes ... and then Israel is surrounded by nuclear countries
Sucks for them, at least they have a 70 year head start on nuke development. This should not be our problem in the slightest.
quote:
now South Korea wants nukes, now Japan wants nukes.
The politics of the region simply don't show that would happen. South Korea recently elected a very dovish President in the face of a nuclear North and hasn't shown any desire to develop nukes. Japan has shown some desire to grow conventional defensive capabilities but nobody I know of there is expressing a desire to develop nukes in part because of our use of them there in WW2. They, and the South Koreans, feel comfortable falling under the US Nuclear Umbrella because a nuclear North does not change the equation in the region all that much. If they didn't want them when the Chinese got them, they won't want them now.
Posted on 5/22/18 at 4:30 am to KSGamecock
quote:
The politics of the region simply don't show that would happen. South Korea recently elected a very dovish President in the face of a nuclear North and hasn't shown any desire to develop nukes. Japan has shown some desire to grow conventional defensive capabilities but nobody I know of there is expressing a desire to develop nukes in part because of our use of them there in WW2. They, and the South Koreans, feel comfortable falling under the US Nuclear Umbrella because a nuclear North does not change the equation in the region all that much. If they didn't want them when the Chinese got them, they won't want them now.
This is exactly what I am talking about. People assume that everyone wants nukes but in reality, the developed world wants less or none. We can't stop these rogue nations from eventually developing nukes. Period; however, we can have measures in place to give them every reason not to launch. Besides, North Korea and Iran just want them as insurance policies. If you were in Iran's shoes or North Korea's shoes, the US looks quite big and scary and an enemy. An Enemy in which was the only one to ever actually use a nuke. I'd say to IRAN, if you develop a nuke or start production of one, we will help Israel have the most powerful Nuke in the region. If you dont want Israel to have a nuke, then don't develop.
This post was edited on 5/22/18 at 4:39 am
Posted on 5/22/18 at 4:32 am to rivermonsters87
Well, NK would surely use them as leverage against the South. And would use the threat of supplying them to Iran, ISIS to dominate policy with the USA. But as far as starting a nuclear holocaust Iran would be a matter of not if but when.You are dealing with the same people whose idea of a perfect life lived is to end it as a suicide bomber. People who strap their 6 year olds with explosive vests. Israel would be forced to make a strike almost immediately. Iran is a strange place. About 70% of the people just want to raise their kids in peace, make some money and retire. The 30% would glory in a mutual destruction of both themselves and Israel. And would 100% trade off getting one bomb exploding in the US for the ending of Iran. The 30% are in power there.
This post was edited on 5/22/18 at 4:34 am
Posted on 5/22/18 at 4:41 am to rivermonsters87
I mean, Manzielathon does kind of have a point to make on the Middle Eastern front but he chose to argue from the Israeli perspective which just doesn't resonate with me as an American so I glossed over it.
What he started arguing, but didn't finish, is that nuclear proliferation in the region is bad because of the instability of some of the countries we're talking about. I kind of doubt that Egypt or Turkey would pursue nukes if Iran got them, but they could. Saudi Arabia would definitely pursue them, and then Qatar would probably want them. KSA could very easily leverage Pakistan and get them relatively quickly.
Their military is absolute shite; very corrupt, lazy, and undisciplined. That wouldn't be huge a issue with large ballistic missiles that can't walk off, but if they wanted smaller nukes it could pose a problem because they'd very likely lose track of one which would be bad for everyone...but "suitcase" and tactical nukes really aren't all that common. The solution to KSA insecurity could be as simple as a nuke sharing or stationing like we did in Turkey for a long time.
What he started arguing, but didn't finish, is that nuclear proliferation in the region is bad because of the instability of some of the countries we're talking about. I kind of doubt that Egypt or Turkey would pursue nukes if Iran got them, but they could. Saudi Arabia would definitely pursue them, and then Qatar would probably want them. KSA could very easily leverage Pakistan and get them relatively quickly.
Their military is absolute shite; very corrupt, lazy, and undisciplined. That wouldn't be huge a issue with large ballistic missiles that can't walk off, but if they wanted smaller nukes it could pose a problem because they'd very likely lose track of one which would be bad for everyone...but "suitcase" and tactical nukes really aren't all that common. The solution to KSA insecurity could be as simple as a nuke sharing or stationing like we did in Turkey for a long time.
This post was edited on 5/22/18 at 4:54 am
Posted on 5/22/18 at 4:52 am to rivermonsters87
Israel and South Korea for starters.
Posted on 5/22/18 at 4:52 am to jimdog
quote:
NK would surely use them as leverage against the South.
OP is arguing just resort to a MAD strategy and tell them to go frick themselves. I don't disagree with him, I think that could work.
quote:
use the threat of supplying them to Iran, ISIS
Which one? Pick one. You cannot have both. Name an airport or port that ISIS currently controls.
quote:
But as far as starting a nuclear holocaust Iran would be a matter of not if but when.
1. Not our problems as Americans
2. This idea that Iran is really as crazy as their most radical rhetoric and they aren't rational actors with hopes for the continued existence of their families is just ridiculous. Today we threatened to destroy all of their allies and in the past we've said we want to remove their democratically elected government, then of course they say "Death to America" and yet we see no hypocrisy in this. They've been invaded by Western Powers twice in the last century, had a democratically elected government overthrown once, and a dictatorship installed with secret police trained and equipped by Israel and the US. Of course these people want Nuclear Weapons, they would be insane not to.
quote:
You are dealing with the same people whose idea of a perfect life lived is to end it as a suicide bomber.
Suicide bombings and their underlying philosophy are almost completely a Sunni thing. Almost all of the worst ideas you have about Muslims are of Sunnis.
quote:
The 30% would glory in a mutual destruction of both themselves and Israel.
The whole second half of your post is you doing what I was talking about earlier. You take the worst parts of their rhetoric, rob them completely of their context, and then say they think like that all the time. It's just lazy and wrong.
Posted on 5/22/18 at 6:13 am to KSGamecock
Can’t believe such a dumb question
Posted on 5/22/18 at 6:27 am to rivermonsters87
quote:
IS this logical or would this be dumb?
Not dumb. Don't let the comments deter you. Countries having nuclear weapons are one thing and that can be dealt with. The bigger problem with Iran is that they support terrorist groups with radical agendas such as the destruction of Israel. By default that makes allies of Israel targets.
The basic problem with Iran having a nuclear weapons program is they would be able to produce material needed for a nuclear weapon. They could then give some of that material to a group like Hamas or some other enemy of Israel, the U.S., etc.... A nuclear weapon isn't that hard to build. There are individuals all over the world that could piece one together but they don't have the nuclear material needed to create the reaction. This is where the real money and high technology come into play.
Posted on 5/22/18 at 6:30 am to rivermonsters87
So you don’t care if we get nuked ? We should bomb their Nuke facilities.
Posted on 5/22/18 at 6:37 am to rivermonsters87
Who cares if John Wayne Gacy has a gun? Just tell him that in the U.S., we have the death penalty. If you hurt somebody, you will die. That will surely deter him from hurting anybody....
Posted on 5/22/18 at 6:37 am to rivermonsters87
North Korea knows that America doesn't invade countries with nukes. That's why they want them so bad.
What gamecock said 100%
Look what has happened to Gadaffi, Sadaam, Mubarak, etc. Rouhani and Il know what eventually happens to dictators when they don't have nuclear capabilities. Like Gamecock said, they may be evil but they are not irrational. I bet the US would have invaded Pakistan by now if they didn't have nukes. In a way the last 40 years of U.S./United Nations meddling has given us these problems. Why keep repeating what hasn't worked?
What gamecock said 100%
quote:
This idea that Iran is really as crazy as their most radical rhetoric and they aren't rational actors with hopes for the continued existence of their families is just ridiculous. Today we threatened to destroy all of their allies and in the past we've said we want to remove their democratically elected government, then of course they say "Death to America" and yet we see no hypocrisy in this. They've been invaded by Western Powers twice in the last century, had a democratically elected government overthrown once, and a dictatorship installed with secret police trained and equipped by Israel and the US. Of course these people want Nuclear Weapons, they would be insane not to.
Look what has happened to Gadaffi, Sadaam, Mubarak, etc. Rouhani and Il know what eventually happens to dictators when they don't have nuclear capabilities. Like Gamecock said, they may be evil but they are not irrational. I bet the US would have invaded Pakistan by now if they didn't have nukes. In a way the last 40 years of U.S./United Nations meddling has given us these problems. Why keep repeating what hasn't worked?
This post was edited on 5/22/18 at 6:48 am
Posted on 5/22/18 at 7:06 am to rivermonsters87
I dont think the risk of proliferation in Asia as a response to a nuclear North Korea is nearly as big as an arms race breaking out in the Middle East if Iran goes nuclear.
South Korea and Japan are both major US allies and fall under our nuclear umbrella. There’s not as much incentive for them to build their own because they know that if NK launches a nuke, the US would drop one on Pyongyang immediately.
The Middle East is a different story. If Iran gets nukes, it could easily start a nuclear arms race in the region. And the odds of a nuke from a Middle East country falling into terrorist hands is a huge threat to world secruity.
South Korea and Japan are both major US allies and fall under our nuclear umbrella. There’s not as much incentive for them to build their own because they know that if NK launches a nuke, the US would drop one on Pyongyang immediately.
The Middle East is a different story. If Iran gets nukes, it could easily start a nuclear arms race in the region. And the odds of a nuke from a Middle East country falling into terrorist hands is a huge threat to world secruity.
Posted on 5/22/18 at 8:34 am to rivermonsters87
You don’t give a monkey a gun.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News