- Joined
- Dec 1, 2018
- Messages
- 37
- Reaction score
- 19
- Location
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
Wait...so I can't sleep soundly anymore? ARRRGGHHH!!!
No need to worry because Kim and Trump have a Love Thing goin on.
WHEW! For a second there I thought I we would actually need a disarmament treaty with specific outlines on disarmament, inspections, and compliance.
Wait...so I can't sleep soundly anymore? ARRRGGHHH!!!
WHEW! For a second there I thought I we would actually need a disarmament treaty with specific outlines on disarmament, inspections, and compliance.
No need to worry because Kim and Trump have a Love Thing goin on.
I guess what I would like to discuss or hear is a solution. How can Kim be brought to the table and responsible negotiations and solutions be reached.
If the solution you seek involves NK denuclearizing, IMO there is none.
Kim, for good reason, believes that having nukes is in his nations best interests and that denuclearizing puts his nation at risk of invasion.
I realize that he uses it as a protection device but is there a way to come to an agreement wherein we can be somewhat assured that he will not use them. Many nations have nuclear capability but we are not necessarily over concerned with annihilation from them because we have a general understanding. I just wonder is there a platform that we can jump off of that will lead to an equilibrium? A diplomatic solution?
It is not merely a defensive measure. In fact, I would argue that, given NKs conventional forces which are capable of destroying SK and its population and Chinas pledge to defend NK against invasion, it has no need to have nuclear weapons for defensive purposes.
If a non-nuclear NK were to invade SK, it knows it would have to do battle with the US, which has an overwhelming superiority in conventional forces, not to mention its nuclear arsenal. However, with nuclear weapons and ICBMs which can deliver them to mainland USA, it becomes questionable as to whether the US would intervene and risk nuclear devastation to its cities in order to defend SK.
It is similar to the situation in Europe when the USSR developed and ICBMs. Up until that time, the Europeans had no nukes. They depended on the US nuclear arsenal to defend them. So in order to have credible nuclear threat they could use, they developed some of their own.
Agreed. But now that NK is in fact a nuclear power and we know they won't reverse that fact under any circumstances wouldn't it be best to attempt to begin negotiations with them (if that is even possible) for an agreement like what we need to re- negotiate with Russia and like what we have in place with other nations with nuclear power worldwide? I mean if NK is going to keep the weapons then it just makes sense to begin nuclear talks as if dealing with a nuclear power. What else can you do? If they have them they have them and we can tell them to disarm all we want but if they say no then what? The world goes to nuclear war? No. Negotiations are the only way now. Besides if we try and cut them off with bans and tariffs and so forth they will only get assistance from the rest of the communistic world which they have already shown they are willing to do. Your thoughts.
Of course a diplomatic solution is preferred, even if it involves recognizing NK as a nuclear power. However, such an agreement requires a level of mutual trust that I suspect does not exist.
If the solution you seek involves NK denuclearizing, IMO there is none.
Kim, for good reason, believes that having nukes is in his nations best interests and that denuclearizing puts his nation at risk of invasion.
Well, history might have been different if Saddam had had nukes. I'm certainly not advocating that minor-league despots arm themselves with nuclear weapons, I'm just sayin'.
WHEW! For a second there I thought I we would actually need a disarmament treaty with specific outlines on disarmament, inspections, and compliance.
WHEW! For a second there I thought I we would actually need a disarmament treaty with specific outlines on disarmament, inspections, and compliance.
And remember: how utterly and naively he fails, he is still better than Obama because at least he tried
(No, really. Some people actually typed that a few months back).
Who knew this would be so hard?
I guess what I would like to discuss or hear is a solution. How can Kim be brought to the table and responsible negotiations and solutions be reached.
If the solution you seek involves NK denuclearizing, IMO there is none.
Kim, for good reason, believes that having nukes is in his nations best interests and that denuclearizing puts his nation at risk of invasion.
I'm pretty sure he was paying close attention to what happened with Gaddafi. Any chance of denuclearization (I doubt there was any to begin with to be honest) was completely thrown out the window. America simply can't be trusted, even more so with Trump in office. The only reasonable option is to simply ignore them, Kim wants to stay in power so the likelyhood of him attacking the US is virtually zero as he knows that would essentially garauntee his death.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?