This opinion piece reminds me of South Korea and why nukes may not be a bad idea for South Korea to have, considering history and Korea’s geographic position.
Matters of Pride . . .
Previous post: Lee Myung-bak is not dead yet
Next post: Double Trouble: Kim Jong Il Is Really Dead??
{ 34 comments… read them below or add one }
Will anyone second a nomination of this bit of nonsense for the mother of all non-sequiturs? What are you smoking there, hombre, a bit of caked-up Tide you’ve mistaken for crack?
There are days when I think a nuke for this region is not a bad idea too |)
Seconded, Sperwer.
2, 3
Thirded, dabodayaz
#1, #3
couldn’t agree more
I edited the entry for clarity and saved some Tide for you “Sperwer”.
Nope… it still makes no sense for South Korea to have nuclear weapons. Thanks for playing, though.
I don’t understand.South Korea gets both Dokdo and the nuke?
To play with the logic on the article,at least Japan must seize the rock first!
If a unified Korea is to survive between Japan and China and below the USA and Russia, we will need to have nukes.
That is the way.
Until the existing nuclear powers actually follow through with their commitments to the nuclear proliferation treaty, it is the resposibility of every nation to develop nuclear weapons to be able to defend themselves.
Disarmament before proliferation
Well, imagine if the US withdraws forces from Korea, a pretty plausible scenario. The North has the missile capability to atack Okinawa and Guam, perhaps Hawaii. Is a US threat to retalliate with nukes against a NK nuclear attack on the South really credible? This is why France and Britain developed their own nukes.
don’t mean to hijack this thread as i don’t know where to submit articles to for the editors of this awesome blog…..but after i read this, this just makes me sick.
not the murder….that happens all the time, but rather how the school continued with classes in the afternoon after the attack occurred.
http://english.chosun.com/w21data/html/news/200808/200808220021.html
You might try posting in the open thread “James”.
Personally, I know if one guy in my neighborhood has a gun and I don’t and he is a thug, I am going to get myself a gun even if the cops say I can’t have one. It is pure street and it makes sense everywhere I’ve been in the world.
Go on R.Elgin, get a gun.
You are a much worldly traveller, you know how it works everywhere you’ve been in the world, it will be OK.
I think if the implication of the article and the OP’s suggestion is that SK needs nuclear weapons to stave off the kind of low-level wars over territorial disputes that are described in the article, then one really only needs to look at the Kashmir dispute to see how much one or both states having nukes goes towards promiting peace in a region. Or heck, look at exactly how much help Israel gets towards promiting regional peace and stability from having nuclear weapons.
Yes, lets use a neo-fascist state like Israel as an example of the contribution nuclear weapons can make to humanity.
Not that I have anything against Jews, but that is a nation of cunts.
(Excuse me as I wash my mouth out with soap)
As a nation with nuclear capabilities ever started a war with another
nation also possessing nuclear weapons?
Some international relations scholars can argue nuclear weapons decrease the chance of war.
What makes you think South Korea doesn’t have nukes?
correction
HAS a nation……(not As)
#17
A: Being a signatory to the NPT.
B: Denouncing NK for their nuke ambitions
C: Publicly admitting not to have or seeking to create nuclear weapons.
Of course..this could all be a facade for a cladestine nuke plan.
Then again…KJI is dead, man never landed on the moon, 9/11 was staged. etc etc
You think the Koreans would be able to keep nukes a secret?
20/Linkd – I’m sure the South Koreans would announce their new nuclear technology months before it was completed… and quietly let the world think they had ICBMs when really the warheads were all blank due to insufficient research. Dr. Hwang was not an isolated incident.
I still think N. Korea detonated a big bunch of TNT and claimed it was a small nuke…
#12
It makes me think the quote “The best defense is offense…” Nuke is last option whereas it is every country’s interest to have an powerful military to deter any possible aggression. However, I doubt ROK can arm to its teeth like Singapore (heavy weaponary in comparsion to the country size) without compromise its economic growth. That will be too much sacrafices..I remembered Pres. Noh said the need for Korea to establish idependent defense capability 자주국방. Good direction and eventual goal but by having a nuke before establishing the Air, Naval, Intellgence capability like Pakistan/India will just invite problems to the neighbor countries…
It’s all too complicated, too much history around here, too much emotion, too much distrust, too little communication…
Better just keep inviting the US Army to stick around.
#16
Pakistan and India go at each other all the time in regional disputes, and they both have nukes.
Why the US continues to accept the invitation, I have no idea.
#19,
A. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/07/international/asia/07korea.html
B. So did the US, and we all know they’ve got the bomb.
C. See A. Besides, would you tell your secrets to any reporter who asks?
#20,
India did for over 20 years. So did Canada until a reporter blew the lid off that story.
Re #6
“Elgin”, If you think that edit solves the problem, of either the non sequitur or the inanity of the idea, you’ve either been sucking the glass pipe too much or ——- not enough!
#26 calls for another second. Totally off the wall post. With Archie Bunker, non sequiturs and malapropisms were funny, but he had good writers.
#24, true. But no nation possesing nukes has ever been invaded as such.
I’ll be happy to be proved wrong if someone one can think of an example.
Okay so re-write the post guys and let’s see how it comes out. So far its been more comedy and BS than thought.
#28 – Not as such, but I don’t think anyone’s talking about invasion. I was under the impression that the article quoted was talking about conflicts over the sort of backwoods, turd-in-a-toilet places that most people wouldn’t care much about in the first place if not for stupid nationalism… Which is exactly the sort of place where nukes would serve absolutely no purpose other than to increase the potential for disaster.
Well, concerns about Korean nuclear ambition can be eased since Korea decided to give up its middle/small size nuclear reactor program (smart).
Some believed that this reactor would be fitted within Korean submarines and ships like the Dokdo, and afterwards would lead Korea to the nuclear bomb. However this is a non-military project, created for commercial application.
I wonder if the USA put some pressure on Korea to finish the SMART program.
Anyway, as a Korean I’m pissed off.
http://joongangdaily.joins.com/article/view.asp?aid=2893179
Considering the ability of the Korean science establishment, I would have to agree that something odd is going on with the SMART program.
Korea should be read to step up and do for themselves — even if it involves borrowing a page from the NK playbook.
You must log in to post a comment.