N Korea conducts Nuclear test. (2 Viewers)

[what971]

Like, I'm not being racist here...but I doubt the chinese government would care that much if they had millions of casualties...they could probably use abit of thinning out of the billion and a half in there.

So, I don't think your postulate holds.

Well I'd rather a conflict between China and NK, instead of NK v. Korea or Japan. Hopefully any conflict won't happen. Cuz lyke ppl dying is BAD.

 

[Ye Olde St Nick]

True about Japan. Shinzo Abe's been looking to 'reform' that constitution for a while now. If NK has the nuke, the LOGICAL step is for Japan, SK and Taiwan to also get nukes. Having said that, these governments might choose to instead bow to American pressure and not act on their national interests which would weaken their position in East Asia.

Fact is, status quo's been changed. To re-align it, Japan and SK will need to develop nukes. Then, China will lose its previous status as the sole nuclear power in East Asia and its influence in East Asia will fall rapidly.

China can sustain alot more nuke hits than any of those other countries.

 

[sunjet]

It'll be interesting to see how China reacts. I suspect the UN won't do anything, USA should impose greater economic sanctions instead of military force (as they love the whole we will protect ourselves ideology), whereas NK probably expects the current impositions to be lifted (as they saw what happened to Pakistan following 98).

 

[what971]

Obviously I don't want to offend the Chinese here, but hopefully this will trigger a China-NK split (something like Sino-Soviet split before?). I'd much rather NK hate on China than the rest of us (just my opinion).

Definately China's more nervous about these events than the SKs, for South Korea a non-nuclear NK is as dangerous as a nuclear one. Not the same for China.

 

[Serius]

Like, I'm not being racist here...but I doubt the chinese government would care that much if they had millions of casualties...they could probably use abit of thinning out of the billion and a half in there.

So, I don't think your postulate holds.

the thing is korea wouldnt be bombing the peasants in bumfuck nowhere, they would be bombing the capital cities where most of the ecconomy is as well as has a large population, all of whom work

if beijing and shanghai were n00ked, china would be back into the stone age.

 

[what971]

I disagree, the UN will write an angery letter

so true.

I doubt the new SG will do much to anger Pyongyang either, Ban Ki Moon's a 'sunshine policy' man. NK's got it sweet from the UN for the next five years at least.

 

[Ye Olde St Nick]

China should just Nuke NK now before they have developed any real nuclear military capabilities.

 

[what971]

NK's chemical weapons are just as deadly as any nuclear weapon.

 

[Ye Olde St Nick]

I don't think they have the same stockpile of them as China has of nukes.

 

[what971]

Supposedly NK's Chemical Weapons can't be stopped through gas marks because it enters through spores in the skin and causes death almost instantly while the person bleeds from the nose, ears and mouth.

Scares the shit out of me. Even more so than nukes.

 

[Ye Olde St Nick]

Yeah, but I don't think they have:
A) Enough of it
B) The capabilities to produce alot more of it quickly enough.

 

[sunjet]

Just destroy their reactors

 

[what971]

For a while now? He's been in power for a week.


The General Consensus is that the current Nuclear Powers will never let NK/Iran to join the party. Both of them will be wiped off the map if the permanent security members see fit.

Yeah but Abe's been talking about the need to change Japan's pacifist constitution ever seen he was virtually hand-picked by Koizumi a few months ago.

You're right about the General Consensus. Except none of the permanent members have the will to wipe them off the map.

 

[banco55]

Australia going nuclear would certainly be in our interest and quite physically possible considering our uranium deposits and technological level, having the effect of thowning off the shackles of US sheriffhood. However, the US would definately not allow us to acquire nuclear weapons as it increases our bargaining power when it comes to foreign relations given that we'd no longer be looking to the US for protection. This is obviously not in their interests.

Probably not on balance. The threat to Australia is more likely to involve something like indonesia breaking up or indonesia seizing pacific islands. All of which a nuclear weapon would be pretty useless to prevent. The US navy however would be a very useful ally to have in a situation like that.

 

[Captain Gh3y]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/6034873.stm

Don't worry guys, the UN has 'strongly condemned' the nuclear test. That should do it. If not, maybe a strongly worded letter will do.

Seriously though if anything attacks the Norks they have enough artillery and the like along the DMZ to cause Seoul to cease to be.

The Americans should issue them an ultimatum to disarm or die.

 

[ElendilPeredhil]

Why would Australia even need nuclear weapons?? It barely has an army and our main form of defence is alliances with other countries. Also, who the hell would bother attacking Australia?! It would be a waste of time and money. It's a huge area, geographically and it's population is low. Maybe smaller scale bombings or something, but I would think even those would be executed by Australian residents, not foreign countries trying invade us or something. If you were going to terrorise a country with intent to cause maximum economic destruction and loss of lives (and spend all that time and money developing these weapons) - Australia would not be on top of your hit list, by far. USA, UK, some other European or major Asian countries, maybe.
Well thats my opinion, anyway.

Probably not on balance. The threat to Australia is more likely to involve something like indonesia breaking up or indonesia seizing pacific islands. All of which a nuclear weapon would be pretty useless to prevent. The US navy however would be a very useful ally to have in a situation like that.

yep. We'd pretty much be buggered if Indonesia decided to invade us and all we had was nuclear weapons- what could we threaten them with: 'we'll bomb the parts of australia you have taken over!'

Although I do think that in regards to nuclear weapons, either everyone has them, or no-one does. Not even the US should be allowed nuclear weapons.

 

[melb22]

Indonesia by 2050 would be quite strong militarily and economically. Even though it would still have a lower std of living compared to western countries it would be something similiar to what malaysia has today comparatively to australia. Their gdp/capita would be around a quarter that of aus which is not bad when u take the ppp into account. it will be by then among the top 10-12 biggest economies by gdp on the planet and even bigger in terms of ppp and with a population of 300+ million people. It would be bigger then britain, france or germany in ppp.

 

[_dhj_]

yep. We'd pretty much be buggered if Indonesia decided to invade us and all we had was nuclear weapons- what could we threaten them with: 'we'll bomb the parts of australia you have taken over!'

Although I do think that in regards to nuclear weapons, either everyone has them, or no-one does. Not even the US should be allowed nuclear weapons.

I think you are underestimating the power of nuclear weapons as a deterrent. If indonesia invaded us of course we would give one to Jakarta. That goes without saying.

the thing is korea wouldnt be bombing the peasants in bumfuck nowhere, they would be bombing the capital cities where most of the ecconomy is as well as has a large population, all of whom work

if beijing and shanghai were n00ked, china would be back into the stone age.

Wtf would North Korea bomb China - its only friend in the universe. NK developed weapons not to threaten China but to bring the US to the negotiating table on a one to one basis, with the intention of securing a non-aggression treaty. The reason why the US advocated for the six party bullshit is to avoid one to one dialogue with a "rogue state".

 

[sunjet]

It'll be interesting to see how China reacts. I suspect the UN won't do anything, USA should impose greater economic sanctions instead of military force (as they love the whole we will protect ourselves ideology), whereas NK probably expects the current impositions to be lifted (as they saw what happened to Pakistan following 98).

Today's News:

Ted Galen Carpenter, a foreign policy analyst with the Cato Institute, a Washington think tank, said North Korea's rationale for the test is to improve its bargaining position in future talks, as India and Pakistan appeared to after testing in 1998. "This is part of a long-term strategy," he said. North Korean officials "concluded a good many years ago that the way to retain clout is to have a nuclear arsenal. I suspect Pakistan is their model."

The United States has signaled it won't mount a military response. An attack on the North could prompt it to launch a counterattack on Seoul. That, in turn, would suck in the 28,000 U.S. troops in South Korea and endanger millions of South Korean civilians.

An alternative is economic sanctions. North Korea's isolated populace of 22 million has already endured bracing poverty and famine for decades, not to mention almost total isolation under a totalitarian regime. Researchers at Johns Hopkins University estimate that as many as 2 million North Koreans died of hunger and related diseases during the mid-1990s.

 

[melb22]

imho, if usa had not threatened and bullied nth korea, they wouldnt have tested. When u push someone in the cnr u get something like this......