Why shouldn't the DPRK have nukes?
Why shouldn't the DPRK have nukes?
All urls found in this thread:
Same reason Trump shouldn't be allowed to authorize military action.
Because they'd probably be willing to sell them to some rich Arab who promises to put Kim in a major motion picture.
Plus it makes chlorine gas which can kill you. Good times.
I have all of these ingredients. Gonna have to try this later.
Because we have nukes and we say so.
The DPRK has not interfered in 3rd world democracies like the US and has not spent the last 50 years invading foreign soil. The US has proved itself to be significantly less trust worthy with nukes than the DPRK
because they test them more than Freddie Mercury was taking AIDS tests in the 80's.
When you test something you know you are gonna want to use it. No one buys a gun in self protection, everyone wants to have someone break through their window so they can shoot them and be the hero.
In his tiny, diluted little mind he thinks he's being some kind of hero, or at least fighting a war his father couldn't win.
Its like trusting a nigger at a bank or with a gun, sooner or later he's going to steal all the money and go ham with the gun, that's why the NORK's shouldn't have nukes.
1) The populace is starving, so the Pig of the north (Kim-cheeky) can fund his nuclear ambition.
2) The Irrational leader has been constantly threatening to attack. That's like giving a Bazooka to the kid who keeps saying he's gonna shoot up his school.
3) Being retarded peasants, there is a high chance of 'oops' Chernobyl
high poverty and inequality levels
Irrational and untrained leader
You're thinking of the US
Well except the DPRK just got nukes and is already threatening Guam and the US with them while the US has had nukes since 1945 and never used them since Japan.
The DPRK has not interfered in 3rd world democracies like the US
That's from lack of ability, not desire.
The US has proved itself to be significantly less trust worthy with nukes than the DPRK
We've been able to destroy any country on the planet for over 50 years and have not. DPRK is just now getting to the point where it can nuke another country, so let's see if they can go 5 years before making such an uninformed statement.
The imperialist US dropped 26,171 bombs in 2016 alone. The are a danger to humanity. The DPRK warns the US not to do the same to them and now they are made out to be the bad guys.
We've been able to destroy any country on the planet for over 50 years and have not.
Well except, Iraq 1991-2003 (US/UK on regular basis), Iraq 2003-2015, Afghanistan 2001-2015, Pakistan 2007-2015, Somalia 2007-8, 2011, Yemen 2009, 2011, Libya 2011, 2015, Syria
Another non-American too ashamed to say what pussy country he's from.
None of them were nuked. They can be rebuilt. Their "people" are expendable anyway. Dirt farming uneducated savages.
high poverty and inequality levels
US = Poor because of corporate/rich people's tax avoidance.
North Korea = Poor because selling food to other countries to raise money for nuclear, rather than feeding is own people. Also sells it's people for slave labour in places like Poland.
Grows plenty of food, yet it magically disappears, and they scream for food-aid.
Somehow money for nuclear technology magically appears when the food dissipaters.
No nukes=North Koreans get to eat their own food.
If you're implying that creates mustard gas, then you're retarded. You need mustard to make mustard gas, idiot.
Because the world agreed long ago that no new countries would develop or deploy nuclear weapons.
ITT we discuss settled facts and history taught to 8 year olds
America lobs cruise missiles at 3rd world countries. You could not be a greater nation of cowards.
WATCHA GON DO FAGGOT
MAKE MORE SHITTY LEFTIST MEMES
FOH BACK TO YOUR CIGARETTE SCENTED BASEMENT
What country are you from? I'm guessing you're too much of a coward to answer truthfully, or at all.
Mustard gas =/= chlorine gas.
There is no mustard in mustard gas, either.
7/10 for getting me to respond.
Because a rogue military state threatening American economic and military allies is against the US's international interests?
Yup, America isn't a saint by any means but DPRK is threatening holocaust, something no other nation on earth has done.
reap what you sow faggot.
Thanks for the (You), dumbass.
Don't be telling people to mix the two because someone could die. Not cool.
Some kids should be separated from their toys until they learn to behave themselves properly as adults is all.
Because they are even more unhinged that our current nuke-holders.
except that DPRK is actually making public announcements saying that they will launch nukes at the US. Nobody has to tell me to fear that. I innately fear the possibility of a nuclear exchange. I am sentient and I understand and respect the destructive power of nuclear weapons.
Pull your head out of your asshole. Thanks.
No probably. Kim is using his nuke and rocket tests as a kind of advertising campaign. You can bet countries are getting ready to throw their panties at NK as NK will deal with people no other country would sell weapons to.
Imagine African warlords with their own ICBMs sort of thing
I don't think you understand the word "meme".
HAHAHA you are so funny
Would you prefer we invaded 3rd world countries? Cruise missiles are quick, cheap, and easy. People need killing, and Tomahawks work perfectly when you dont want boots on the ground
because i'm not korean
Would you prefer we invaded 3rd world countries?
I think it's pretty obvious, given how bogged down in the Middle East you are, for oil only, let's be honest, you couldn't sustain any such invasions or the disruption to trade that could result.
That other faggot is like the stupid movie hero who throws his gun away so he can settle it with the villain "like men", only to have the villain pull out a second gun and shoot him.
stupid fucking question unless you are north Korean,
Ideally the only country that should have nukes is my own.
All countries operate around this axis, l2politics idiot
Fun fact. The US has never made 1 penny off of Iraqi oil. The UK has made a fuckload, but not the US.
Another fun fact. Afghanistan doesnt have oil, nor any valuable natural resources.
The more you know...
video of some fat nork speaking chingchong talk
media says it's Kim Jong Un threatening America
How do you even know anything for sure?
What kind of tinfoil hat bullshit are you on? lol are you saying Kim Jong Un doesnt actually exist and everything is just made up so the US can invade a backwater shithole of a country no one cares about except NK, SK, and China?
Anyone can, but should a crazy man saying that he will shoot someone be allowed to get a gun?
Actually no, not "everyone" can have nuclear weapons. The fact that the world has allowed NK to even get this far is disturbing. Clinton should have put a stop to it in the 90s when we had the first information about their weapons program.
No country can develop nuclear weapons unless they had them before 1968. Its why Iran pretends their nuclear program is "for domestic power production"
Only countries which signed the non-nuclear proliferation accord are bound to it. Even then, like the Paris accord it's all just legal mumbo jumbo easily discarded whenever its convenient.
If we destroyed those places our military would have no place to play with its new toys every few years.
Except both NK and Iran signed the NNPT (though NK withdrew when they were caught developing weapons anyway)
You dont take countries to court. There is no "country jail" when you break the rules. Not obeying the NNPT is the ground work for a declaration of war and massive international sanctions through the UN. Sure, dont obey it... but no one is going to come help you when your country is a smoldering crater either
BTW, it wasnt an accord, it was a ratified treaty. Each signatory country had to ratify it through their own processes. Its legally binding as any treaty is. An accord is basically just a promise with no weight of law behind it
It's all meaningless really. Countries promise to be good and then they aren't. Again and again, nothing really changes with people except our ability to kill one another keeps getting better.
trying this later
It'd be better if no one had them, but that's out of the question at this point so I see nothing wrong with NK or any other country having them aswell.
Crippling international sanctions work well on countries who arent determined to live in a time period before the internet, cell phones, etc. The other options take strong countries to have had enough and use force.
In the end, you either obey, or you will be forced to obey. There is no middle ground. You do what you are told, or you wont have ears to hear the warning a second time
Because they aren't adequate
The DPRK need all the best WMDS
in case aliens
Afghanistan is the heroin growing capitol of the world. Learn how the CIA operates and then you get to have opinions.
Those new sanctions are a joke. The DPRK probably spent over a billion this year alone test firing missiles.
Are we supposed to believe that the measily $3b they get from trade anyway would have any real impact at this point? Seems like a smoke and mirrors act to me that this does anything but give us all more time to believe things will somehow work out in our favour before coming to reality.
Except the US has allowed the poppy farmers to keep their farms as it was deemed "destructive to their economy" to stop them from exporting drugs.
Amazing. They let them keep growing the thing the CIA wants to control. Nothing going on behind the scenes there...
everyone wants a break in
Speak for yourself please.
Sanctions dont work against people like NK for 2 main reasons. 1. their pretty much only trade partner (China) doesnt obey the sanctions they themselves signed off on. 2. NK is living in a world that passed 70 years ago. The majority of NKs do not have TVs in their home. Cell phones were outright banned until a few years ago (and even now, you only get signal in the north near the Chinese border)
This IS all smoke and mirrors and has been since 2003 when we had concrete proof NK was developing weapons. The only thing that ends this is military force.
Let's hope it ends better this time than last time. I sure hope China is on our side. During the Korean war, at least 8 Chinese divisions were engaged in the conflict. Let alone North Korean forces and the 60 years of paranoia, digging in and fortifications to contend with on their turf.
Be easier and cheaper to just turn it into a glass parking lot and let radiation do the rest.
That would have never had happen if we intervene in the Sino civil war
The same people
Stop with this faggotry OP.
They don't have or feel any responsibility to any other country through either treaty or trade other than possibly China and therefore they have nothing to lose on the world stage for starting shit. They believe their leader is a god and are mostly cut off from the rest of the world intellectually, financially, and socially.
They are literally the school shooter of world countries.
cos they will use them to barter for shit like power, influence and food for their peasants
have you heard Kim Jong threaten america himself?
Or are you relying on what the media interpreters are telling you? Either way, how long did it take for you to learn korean? Long enough to realize that we can edit and manipulate videos?
Fun fact. The US has never made 1 penny off of Iraqi oil.
Afghanistan doesnt have oil, nor any valuable natural resources.
What is opium? Bonus question, what is the opioid epidemic?
Be easier and cheaper to just turn it into a glass parking lot and let radiation do the rest.
I'm sure China and our south korean allies would love sharing borders with an irradiated hellscape. I'm sure china wouldn't retaliate or anything
There is no comprehensive nuclear weapons ban under international law, and in fact the UN has affirmed the right of each state to provide for their own protection.
So in that respect, DPRK has every right to develop nuclear weapons (as does Iran).
Political trick would be to have them do the job for us, to maintain the stability of the Korean peninsula.
Because they threatened us with them.
someone skipped the unit on the Constitution in high school
The fat fuck in OP's post would probably die of the work load in the factory/field, he probably believes he would be a party official or intelligensia or some stupid shit
To your point, they also have a massive amount of rare minerals that are critical to high tech manufacturing. Estimates are that the current value of these minerals is over $1trillion.
you mean that they would help north korea defeat the south in order to diminish US influence in the area?
I was just saying that you have no way of knowing he really said what they say he said, because he is speaking a language you don't speak.
But yeah, NK could be completely made up for all we know. Do you have family there? Ever been? Know anyone who has?
China is South Korea's #1 trading partner with $131b in trade. But yeah, China doesn't want the US on its doorstep definitely.
almost got it there.
it's against everybody's best interests to have a madman in control of nukes. the threats have been made, the tests are ongoing, the only thing missing is the actual payload.
we have to bear in mind that DPRK is a rogue state, that has so far been kept in rein by it's former isolationism, a policy that is apparently no longer being followed.
and yes, it's like giving a mentally unbalanced person a gun. exactly like. you just don't know what the end result will be, and that's why you don't give mentally unstable people guns.
puppet faces infront of the same group of shitheads who perpetuate wars for profit
too stupid to recognize everyone you listed is merely a hostage
i pity ye fool
grab your tin foil hats here!
US will provoke the wrong country soon and that will be the end of us all.
This shit cannot go on for much longer
Remind me, who dropped a nuke at the end of WWII, just for the heck of it? US just had to test it, right? How many civilians died from that testing?
Doing so saved millions of lives. I believe it was justified at the time given the circumstances.
just for the heck of it
not knowing a damn thing about the u.s. bombing of the japanese mainland and that the nukes most likely saved more lives than they took
Good try, fucktard.
Japan all but surendered at that point in the war, the nukes were deployed just to make a statement, and to do some testing as well. I call that the biggest war crime in history. No country in history ever killed so many civilians and did so much damage to make a statement
They had not surrendered and were preparing their people to fight to the death, which is very Japanese anyway to repel the invaders.
Invading Japan would have cost millions of lives to do what the bomb accomplished as terrible as it was.
Japan all but surendered at that point in the war
So they hadn't surrendered, and were still fighting.
80 000 people died in Hiroshima immediately and another 70 000 later because of radiation and injuries.
Second bomb (Nagsaki) killed 22 000 people and another 39 000 from radiation and injuries.
Those are civilians, not soldiers. There were recommendations to drop it on the non-populated areas but the US leaders wanted so hard to kill some gooks
Same when they firebombed Dresden. In major conflicts, you target the civilians since once supplies stop going to the war machine, the war machine effectively stops.
You're ignoring the shipyards, air bases, ammunition depots, barracks, and naval bases that the cities were home to. Both cities were valid military targets.
24 hours of conventional bombing in tokyo killed more people than both nuclear bombs combined.
Do you somehow think we would've stopped bombing if we decided to invade the mainland rather than drop the nukes?
It was a risk for sure, but a risk that paid off and ended the war in the pacific.
As far as locations, give me a location that doesn't kill anyone or kills much less that still gets the japs to stop fighting. What part of Japanese military doctrine makes you think they were making rational decisions?
Just to add, both general McArthur and Eisenhower were strong critics against using the nuclear weapons. It was not necessary because the Japan industry and food production was completely destroyed. They were simply not able to continue fighting for much longer. But hey, US just had to showcase their new expensive toy. It is estimated that about 250 000 thousand people died immediately and during 5 years after the bombing due to radiation, cancer and leukemia. Nice eh
Perhaps they should have considered the consequences of starting a war before they began their aggressive expansion.
So you approve dropping nuclear bombs on countries that start wars? Remeber that one, it might come in handy soon. I hope this madness stops but since we have mad men running countries, we are looking at a final war, very soon
Start shit, get hit. The actions of the Japanese in Banking justify both atomic bombs even if they had surrendered, which they hadn't. The Japanese walk like men but they're beasts.
You are not wrong that there were probably other ways they could have ended the war. Announcing they would allow retention of the emperor possibly would have been one of them. But if you think for one second the dropping was because "meh, fuck it, sounds fun" you are a fucking idiot. There was much planning and debate about nukes as an option and for whatever reason, they decided to drop them. It worked.
As I said before, the conventional bombing campaign continuing would have been decidedly more brutal than the nukes were, even with the deaths from the after-effects. There's no arguing this.
Just fyi it is generally accepted opinion that US started a lot of shit in the last 50 years. So your logic implies that if US was nuked it would be the logical consequence. Just to be clear, honestly I wish the damn thing would explode in the face of everyone who even thought of making it. Civilians should never be a logical target in any war
So much misunderstanding of japanese government before and during the war in this thread. By the time the bombs were dropped, the figures in power in Japan were brutal as fuck and not even approaching rational in their decision-making process. Japanese propaganda was Nazi-tier and they ruled with an iron fist. Do a little research and you will see that the only thing that could've stopped them was a big statement. They would've starved their people to fight a ground war. Hell, they already were.
Not being a dick, but most westerners don't know the first thing about japanese history between ww1 and the end of ww2.
There are valid reasons for and against, but I honestly believe they had no idea about what kind of weapon they created. After the first bomb, Japan was ready to surender. Why was the second one dropped?
therefore they have nothing to lose on the world stage for starting shit.
Their own lives maybe?
Because they didn't fucking surrender. You keep saying, "they were ready to surrender," but the fact remains they did not surrender until after being hit again. What were they waiting for if they were so ready to surrender?
The second bomb was dropped to scare the Russians and the rest of the world. Dropping the second bomb made our enemies question how many more we had.
They were ready to surender but under some conditions. US did not want to negotiate terms but went ahead and dropped another one. Japan then surrendered to prevent 3rd bombing. I'll say it again: Japan war machine was broken, they had no food, even US generals were against using nuclear weapons... killing civilians is a war crime, or maybe not if US does it?
Russia has more warheads than the US, but only 500 or so. About as many as the rest of the world put together.
Before the bombs, US gave Japan an ultimatum, total surrender and get rid of the emperor
US repeats demand, Japan refuses. US moves goalposts and allows them to keep the emperor
No justification for one of the world's biggest war crimes
And when there are mad people who are running countries and not scared of US, what then? Do we just go ahead and nuke them or provoke them to launch a nuke on their neighbors?
Russia has more warheads than the US, but only 500 or so.
Russia did not have nukes at that time.
They were ready to surender but under some conditions.
So they weren't ready to surrender, got it. The loser in war does not get to dictate the terms of surrender.
Right, but they didn't nuke anyone... yet. And I hope it never happens
killing civilians is a war crime
But bombing cities from the air was not a war crime in that time. And the fact that the generals were against it's use is meaningless since it wasn't up to them. Truman wanted a quick end to the war so that hundreds of thousands of U.S. troops wouldn't have to die in invasion.
You and me both
so basically because they both hurt your feelings and make you worry there'll be a day where your faggotry is ended?
US did not want to talk anymore, and commited the most horrific war crime ever. Japan wanted to surender but US leaders were drunk with power.
Japan wanted to surender
But they didn't, did they?
uhhh... you mean like how allies terror-bombed non strategic targets day and night in europe/asia?
you wont find any building older than 1945 in tokyo, it was firebombed into extinction and then had its ashes firebombed into extinction.
that's not what I was told growing up in russia. The americans stole the ideas for the atom bomb from the russians and then started using it when noble Stalin had promised never to use it on the nazis because he knew what a terrible weapon of destruction it was
More worried all the faggotry will end but Trumps and Kim Jong # UN's
Bearing arms is an inalienable right. Why the fuck can't I have nukes?!?!
Ok that's enough for today, no sense in going any further. I'm sorry that so many people died and I hope I don't live to see this happening again in my lifetime. But it seems there are a lot of people wanting it
I'm sorry that so many people died
Me too, shame that they refused to surrender on our terms when they had the chance.
Because you're too stupid to maintain them in a state that will prevent them from blowing up on their own and killing millions of people in 1 shot