World Idiots

Ya...America is a police state and as soon as there is a revolution....

what rot....


Listen, the Americans are a little cranky right now. Some of them still remember 21 gents who just decided to fly perfectly good airplanes into two buildings to prove a point of how anti-American they can be. So when Americans see other nations provoking things, some of them don't take it well. Hey, it is part of human nature....

As for the Chinese putting out an anti-satellite weapon, I fail to see the point in doing it if you are only now going toturn around and ask the US to dump their Anti-Sat weapons. You want a non profileration treaty to rid the world of a weapon, making one is NOT the way I would do it....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mark in Oshawa

As for the Chinese putting out an anti-satellite weapon, I fail to see the point in doing it if you are only now going toturn around and ask the US to dump their Anti-Sat weapons. You want a non profileration treaty to rid the world of a weapon, making one is NOT the way I would do it....

---

I'm far from sure that the Chinese are sincere about this, but I think it would actually make sense if they were. You can't go into a negotiation saying "Listen, that weapon you have. We want you to give it up." Well, you could of course, but it wouldn't do you much good.

You'd get a much better result if you said, "That weapon we both have... We don't really need it, do we?"

On a more general note, I guess it's inevitable that as China's economy continues to grow at a much faster pace than those in Northern America and Western Europe, it's position - it's relative muscle - will grow also. In the end, and within the next century, I think it's fairly clear that China will become more powerful than the US. In the end, 300 million people can't match 1.3 billion in terms of output. Of course, the US has Europe - despite the occasional bickering we are obviously very much on the same side. And then, thank God, there's India... :)

Another very interesting question, of course, is what sort of developments will an increasingly powerful China encourage in Russia.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hawkmoon

The Ayatollah in Tehran is not a rational, sane person.

---

Which Ayatollah? There are many of them. And how do you know he's not a rational sane person? Do you know him personally?

If you mean their Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, he has been elected by the Assembly of Experts, who can also dismiss him if they don't like him or think he's nuts:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supreme_Leader_of_Iran

"The Supreme Leader of Iran is responsible for the delineation and supervision of "the general policies of the Islamic Republic of Iran". The Supreme Leader is Commander-in-Chief of the armed forces, controls the military intelligence and security operations; and has sole power to declare war. The heads of the judiciary, state radio and television networks, the commanders of the police and military forces and six of the twelve members of the Council of Guardians are appointed by the Supreme Leader. The Assembly of Experts elects and dismisses the Supreme Leader on the basis of qualifications and popular esteem--none have ever been dismissed.[1] The Assembly of Experts is responsible for supervising the Supreme Leader in the performance of legal duties."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hawkmoon

The same goes for Kim Jong Il. He's been shooting missles over the Sea of Japan.

---

So? It's not that the US has never tested their weapons at the Pacific Ocean. Have you heard of Bikini (the atoll, not the swimwear)?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bikini_Atoll

"Bikini Atoll (also known as Pikinni Atoll) is an uninhabited 6.0-square-kilometer atoll in one of the Micronesian Islands in the Pacific Ocean. It is a member of the Marshall Islands. It consists of 36 islands surrounding a 594.2-square-kilometer lagoon. As part of the Pacific Proving Grounds it was a site of more than 20 nuclear weapons tests between 1946 and 1958, including the first test of a practical hydrogen bomb in 1954.

The navigator and explorer Otto von Kotzebue named Bikini Atoll Eschscholtz Atoll after the scientist Johann Friedrich von Eschscholtz.

Preceding the nuclear tests, the indigenous population was relocated to Rongerik Atoll. The tests began in July 1946. In the late 1960s and early 1970s, some of the original islanders returned from Kili Island but were removed because of the high radioactivity."

Another thread descends into Eki vs Rest :rolleyes:

Eki.

Let's get one thing cleared up. I am all for the abolition of nuclear weapons by all countries.

You cannot honestly compare North Korea, a military dictatorship, or Iran, a religious dictatorship, with the US, a free democracy. Read your own Wikipedia quote about Iran. The leader controls everything from the military to the justice system to radio and television. He is not elected by the people and cannot be removed by the people. He has the sole power to declare war. If he wants to declare a "holy" war against Israel tommorrow then that's exactly what we will bloody well get.

The comparison between US testing in the 1950's and North Korean testing today is not valid. There was an entirely different mindset throughout the world then than there is today. The Cold War is over and the Superpowers have largely, but not entirely, dismantled their arsenals.

Show me the nuclear threat to North Korea that requires them to develop nuclear weapons. South Korea don't have them, nor do Japan. China is their closest ally, so no threat there. India have no reason to threaten North Korea. Besides, India has problems with Pakistan to keep it busy.

That only leaves Europe and the US, neither of whom have anything to gain from attacking North Korea and risking upseting China. So as far as I can see, North Korea has no valid defensive reason to develop a nuclear arsenal. Which means that the weapons are for offensive purposes. I'm sure Tokyo and Seoul are pretty nervous at the moment.

And how would North Korea use the weapon offensively?
Hitting South Korea would be stupid, you don't want a fallout that near you, how exactly are going to invade Japan.
And if you nuke someone from that area, you have US turning your land into a mush in matter of minutes.
Pyongyang knows this very well, nuke is a last defence weapon for the small country up against likes of US. Remeber they are still technically at war.

"Don't strike here or we'll hit whoever we can reach" is the message North Korea sends with the nuke.

By developing nuclear weapons North Korea are putting themselves under threat. They have no need to develop these weapons. They're not holdovers from the Cold War such as those of other nuclear powers and they are not threatened militarily by anyone. The same thing that stops North Korea from attacking Japan stops others from attacking North Korea and that's a superpower ally, namely China.

Have Finland developed nuclear weapons in response to the years of antagonism with Russia?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by janneppi

And how would North Korea use the weapon offensively?
Hitting South Korea would be stupid, you don't want a fallout that near you, how exactly are going to invade Japan.
And if you nuke someone from that area, you have US turning your land into a mush in matter of minutes.
Pyongyang knows this very well, nuke is a last defence weapon for the small country up against likes of US. Remeber they are still technically at war.

"Don't strike here or we'll hit whoever we can reach" is the message North Korea sends with the nuke.

---

Exactomundo. And IF, and that's still a big IF, Iran is planning to build nuclear weapons and not peaceful nuclear energy as they say, their motive is most likely the same. Both Iran and North Korea saw what happened to Iraq when they didn't have nuclear weapons. That's likely the lesson they learnt.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hawkmoon

Have Finland developed nuclear weapons in response to the years of antagonism with Russia?

---

No.

Couple of years ago Russia did trespass our air space a few times. Guess what we did ?? We verbally disapproved it. When they did it again, we verbally disapproved it strongly.

That's what Finland is cabable of :up:

:dozey:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hawkmoon

Have Finland developed nuclear weapons in response to the years of antagonism with Russia?

---

There has not been any obvious need. Russia has not in the last 60 years verbally or physically attacked us demanding us to change our political system and government. If they had, I certainly hope our government would have tried to do something to strengthen our defense.