-
We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.
N. Korea Nukes
Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
tommywishbone
Platinum Member
Greetings Frackal- It appears you wish to make this personnal. Wow, you're a tough guy on the internet and you're the grammar police. Our hero.
Let's not waste any more vauable forum space. My phone number is 310 392 6004. Give me a call and we'll handle our business.
Tom
Let's not waste any more vauable forum space. My phone number is 310 392 6004. Give me a call and we'll handle our business.
Tom
tommywishbone
Platinum Member
Bump
tommywishbone
Platinum Member
Thanks officer.
conehead433
Diamond Member
I'm much more disturbed by the fact that dubya has nukes.
3chordcharlie
Diamond Member
A war justified by 'Iraq has broken UN sanctions' would have to be seen as a rogue action when the UN itself declined to act militarily. Can You offer a better set of criteria for a 'rogue nation' than engaging in internationally unpopular military action?
How sweetly paternalistic of you.
The world has never come closer to nuclear war than it did when the US and USSR were the two major nuclear powers.
I don't think anyone can be trusted with nuclear weapons.
Heh. This whole pseudo-discussion exemplifies just how successful the whole "Us vs Them" approach to shaping domestic opinion really can be, and just why it's so important for the perception of powerful enemies to be cultivated. Knee-jerk emotionalism is easily exploited as a unifying force, and that unity can easily be diverted to other unrelated purposes.
Basically, the whole argument boils down to "It's teh cwazy, teh ebil NKoreans we're talkin' 'bout!" which is precisely what you're supposed to believe, as that kind of public sentiment allows for a variety of equally insane acts on the part of our own leaders, from before Reagan to the present.
As we've seen in the past, a general reduction of tensions leads to the advancement of freedom. Nixon took the initiative wrt China, and it was Gorbachev who took the initiative wrt the cold war, forcing Reagan to set aside the yearnings of his neocon advisers in favor of disarmament. Basically, we're running out of enemies, so it's important to maintain the ones we have, even to create new ones if possible, and to try to make sure that they're not real threats, but rather imaginary ones...
Under the surface of the Admin's bluster, there are forces at work, undermining their efforts to keep the electorate's attention focused on the boogeyman, forces beyond the control of the current leadership... The two Koreas recently agreed to field a single olympic team, and continue to expand economic ties. The more of that happening, the sooner the NKorean regime will collapse into the waiting arms of the SKoreans, just as the EGerman regime collapsed into the arms of the West. Which doesn't serve the Neocon domestic agenda, at all, and is precisely why those efforts are opposed by our own leaders...
Basically, the whole argument boils down to "It's teh cwazy, teh ebil NKoreans we're talkin' 'bout!" which is precisely what you're supposed to believe, as that kind of public sentiment allows for a variety of equally insane acts on the part of our own leaders, from before Reagan to the present.
As we've seen in the past, a general reduction of tensions leads to the advancement of freedom. Nixon took the initiative wrt China, and it was Gorbachev who took the initiative wrt the cold war, forcing Reagan to set aside the yearnings of his neocon advisers in favor of disarmament. Basically, we're running out of enemies, so it's important to maintain the ones we have, even to create new ones if possible, and to try to make sure that they're not real threats, but rather imaginary ones...
Under the surface of the Admin's bluster, there are forces at work, undermining their efforts to keep the electorate's attention focused on the boogeyman, forces beyond the control of the current leadership... The two Koreas recently agreed to field a single olympic team, and continue to expand economic ties. The more of that happening, the sooner the NKorean regime will collapse into the waiting arms of the SKoreans, just as the EGerman regime collapsed into the arms of the West. Which doesn't serve the Neocon domestic agenda, at all, and is precisely why those efforts are opposed by our own leaders...
Does anyone know what happened to the nuclear non-proliferation (sp?) pact? The one that said 'No other countries will attempt to create nuclear weapons and we (the ppl with nuke's) will disarm ours'.
Is this still in effect and was N. Korea ever a part of this?
Excuse my ignorance but I was under the impression this was still about.
Is this still in effect and was N. Korea ever a part of this?
Excuse my ignorance but I was under the impression this was still about.
ShadesOfGrey
Golden Member
Do you love re-writing history? Got anything else you'd like to change before the next history text goes to press? :roll:
BTW, we've seen more progress in the N. Korea talks under Bush than we ever have, but I'm sure you'll write down your alternate history for that too.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_Nonproliferation_Treaty
It still exists and was prolongued indefinately in 1995.
North Korea signed and ratified it, but they withdrew in 2003 and claim that they posses nuclear weapons now.
It was Gorbachev's initiative in Iceland that forced Reagan's hand, Shades- Reagan had to re-evaluate, overrule his own advisers to move on to the agreements that led to our current state of affairs wrt the Former Soviet Union. Those are the same guys who advise Bush today.
I'm sure it's been represented in an entirely different light among sources you'd choose to believe, but that doesn't change what really happened, at all. Reagan scrapped Star Wars to reach accord, which was what Gorbachev demanded. Gorbachev had even gone so far as to propose that both sides abandon nukes entirely, something the US was unwilling to accept...
I'm sure it's been represented in an entirely different light among sources you'd choose to believe, but that doesn't change what really happened, at all. Reagan scrapped Star Wars to reach accord, which was what Gorbachev demanded. Gorbachev had even gone so far as to propose that both sides abandon nukes entirely, something the US was unwilling to accept...
Captante
Lifer
That missile N Korea fired over Japan is reason number two why they worry me far more the Iran does in terms of a direct threat & while I doubt they will use nuclear weapons either, their regular army is well equiped, well trained, very tough, loyal & worst of all a very short march from the industrial power-house of South Korea... the cost of a second
major conflict in Korea would be very high.
Reason number one btw is their close proximity to China, a country that has professed to stand with us against them at times, but which I believe when pushed might come down on their side just as they did in the Korean war. If Iran openly declares war on Isreal or worse
fires a missle at Europe they'll be on their own with the exception of a few other radical muslim nations however tough they are...N. Korea just might have China directly backing them up.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 24K
-
-
