 |
Unfortunately there is lots of truth in that statement . Clintoon Secretary of State Madeline Albright champagne toasted Kim Jong mentally ILL when he first emerged ;and Bush grew soft as his term progressed .Quote:
Your namby pamby handling of this over years has got you to this situation
Yes it's all this humanitian nonsense, yes it is sad some of the NK populace suffer but short of war nothing can be done about it
Aa
So what will happen if the NORKS and Iran can't be persuaded to end their nuke program ? Containment ? Not likely... more likely proliferation.
Quote:
Japan may open a plant that can produce eight tons of plutonium a year — enough to make 1,000 to 2,000 nuclear weapons annually. That's at least as many weapons as are in the entire U.S. operationally deployed nuclear force.
Pyongyang Is Not Our Only Nuclear Worry - Henry Sokolski - National Review OnlineQuote:
South Korea also wants to make plutonium-based nuclear fuels from imported U.S. power-reactor assemblies. In a Foggy Bottom press conference with secretary of state John Kerry on April 2, South Korean foreign minister Yun Byung-se made it clear that he wants to revise South Korea's current nuclear cooperative agreement with the U.S. in order to allow Seoul to make such fuel. Kerry said he hoped to resolve the matter soon. He will visit South Korean president Park Geun-hye in Seoul later this month.
What the secretary will offer President Park, though, is still unclear. If he says yes to Seoul, Japan will be dead set on opening its plant at Rokkasho. This, in turn, is likely to prompt China to up its atomic ante. Beijing has been coy about what its true nuclear capabilities are, but it has been toying with the idea of having the French build it a plutonium-extraction plant nearly identical to the one in Japan. China wants to build the plant adjacent to one of its major military nuclear-production sites in Jiayuguan.
So how soon could this be converted into active nuclear weapons ? Well 'The Institute for Science and International Security' thinks the primitive Iranians could convert 25 kg of fissible material into a bomb in 2-3 weeks. Imagine how fast the Japanese or the South Koreans could do it .
Institute for Science and International Security › ISIS Reports › Iran › Stopping an Undetectable Iranian Bomb
And why would this be necessary if both nations are already presumably under the American nuclear umbrella ?
That should be obvious . Why should they trust the US commitment to their defense when push comes to shove ? Emperor 0 has made no bones about the fact that he wants to slash the American military down to size. He has said that he wants to to defund “unproven missile defense systems” (even as he deploys them to Guam) .He wants to create a “world without nuclear weapons” ,and apparently plans to lead by example... i.e. not modernizing the nuclear arsenal.
If I was an ally ;I'd begin to question the US commitment to my defense. What we end up with is MAD... with many fingers on the button.
Okay if all the small fry are afraid of being nuked, then we should nuke a few big mouths and then every thing will go back to normal right? Or should we send Seal Team 1, 2, and three to screw up the works? Oh wait, all those vets coming back from two wars are still trained.
We should take a stronger stand against proliferation... especially by rogue "big mouths" who threaten to use them to destroy nations in their region.
Wait until you see which nations get the bomb if Iran isn't checked real soon.
Can't say I disagree Tom, and one would assume there is much we don't know going on behind closed doors, or by phone.
What part of the existing MAD situation don't you get? We have had MAD up to here for sixty years. I applaud efforts to reduce the nuclear arsenals, not getting bitter and twisted about not having enough nukes. The truth is we can live without nukes, but if proliferation occurs then I would like my nation to possess the deterent because as you say, you can't trust the americans to look out for your interests when they are under direct threatQuote:
If I was an ally ;I'd begin to question the US commitment to my defense. What we end up with is MAD... with many fingers on the button.
Yeah we would all love to sit at the campfire eating s'mores and singing kumbaya . But there are real bad actors out there and what you really want is the good guys to have the biggest weapons.
Don't worry about the US commitment to Aussie .
We are a convenient base of operations, that's how it was in WWII and in various other skermishes, and with your renewed interest in the Pacific/Asia, but we are not the 51st state. We appreciate the alliance but it has been costly and will be again if NK attacks youQuote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
You make it sound like you weren't attacked by the Japanese.. but we know better don't we ?
Yes they had a party in Darwin harbour, sunk an american warship, but that was just over reach they had no intention of invading and we fought them successfully in PNG but again, not Australia. The Japanese quarrell was really with yourselves and the British but as we were alied we were drawn into it as undoubtedly we will be this time
Lol ,your island continent sits on the flank of the most important shipping lane in the world... and you think you are isolated and immune from world events ;except when the powers that provide for that umbrella you live under ask you to contribute. Then it's 'we were drawn into it ' as if a Japanese takeover of the Philippines would not have affected your nation at all. Get real.
Singapore (that shipping lane you are referring to) is a long way from the Australian continent. We are no more isolated from asia than you are, but our attitude is different, we don't seek to dominate. Candidly, the japanse take over of the Philippines would not have affected us if that is all they did, anymore than the japanese takeover of Manchuria and China affected us but there was a wider conflict that we were already part of and thousands of Australian troops defended Malaya and ultimately surrendered Singapore just as you surrendered the Philippines. We have a long history of defending that part of the world and cooperating with the nations of the region without your help. We are a little more skeptical of alliances Tom than perhaps you are. A major ally cast us adrift in WWII when it suited them even when we were making a substantial contribution to their war effort. And we fought beside you in Vietnam for what, so you could give up when it suited you?Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
Now that mouse thinks he's on top, he's dictating the terms of surrender, I told you this was about oriental face
Kerry did his tour and came off looking like a wuss. No doubt both Pyongyang and Beijing both feel like victors . Tehran too.
Well what do you expect, this is after all their backyard and you can only come over to play when you are invited
Nonsense ;we have allies there that rely on our assistance against the Chinese aggression. What the Chinese don't get is that there is no way Zero would be doing his 'pivot East ' if he didn't think the Chinese posed a significant security threat to our allies . It's the Chinese expansion and military adventures that is prompting this American policy. Zero doesn't want this .He wants to dismantle our military and use the funds for his statist agenda.
Chinese aggression? A few uninhabited islands and fishing rights? Look I know it's all about oil. BO isn't interested in your allies and the only military adventurism in the region is yours,
Any way Mr Kim uncool has stopped his B/S perhaps those aggressive Chinese have had a word in his pink and shelllike
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:55 PM. |