COMMENTS:
Voted : They did it because they wanted nukes for their own sake
Now, call me when they can put one in the neighborhood of Alaska...
Voted : They did it as a result of american aggression towards them
that was still after the Korean War started right, a war which never officially ended, and so North Korea and the USA are still technically at war and hostile since 1953.
Really Herzog, you have no case.
and Truthseeker013, you are underestimating the range of the North Korean missiles. They can reach the Mid-West.
Voted : They did it because they wanted nukes for their own sake
I've got to research this one ...it's quite possible something they wanted after ww2 and the idea of having the "ultimate weapon"...when you consider all the members of the "nuclear club, it seems to be a "must have" item.
I'm sure its because they desired nuclear weapons. But many countries desire them and many countries have them. Those that don't have them but desire them, try to make them :)
But we don't know why North Korea decided to pursue them. We can't say it is as a result of the Korean war, but we also can't say it is not as a result of the Korean war. Are people saying it is because of something the United States did or said that North Korea wants nuclear weapons? We have had a history of bad relations with them, but I don't see why that would cause them to start a nuclear weapons program, per se.
I'm not sure what the question is exactly. I think it's that we can't blame the United States for North Korea's nuclear weapons program. I think that's very true. But we can also ask if we have in some way made matters worse. I think that is a very fair point to put out there for discussion. Besides, no one has yet to answer the question of why is it okay for us to have them and for us to give them to countries we choose, but it's not okay for a country to pursue the technology on their own. We have to accept the fact that we come across like major hypocrits that from one side of our mouth we preach about non-proliferation of nuclear weapons, and all the while we're preaching, we're giving other countries the technology willingly (e.g. India, Israel, etc.). How is that fair? What message does that send to the world about our word and our intentions?
Reach the Mid West? Hardly. Their missle tests proved they lack the ability to launch them in free flight and deliver them on any target long-range. That's pretty much been established.
we were fighting long before this,
we're actually still at war with them.
I wish we'd have CRUSHED that idiot monster then, he'd be nothing but the Past now. Our soldiers' years in the woods was not the answer I guess :|
by Jyl on Thu Oct 19, 06 8:34pm
[+]
*WERE
by Jyl on Thu Oct 19, 06 8:35pm
[+]
You leave out a key qualifier, herzog -- I would say "perceived" aggression. This encompasses real and/or imagined.
Also, have you forgotten a little event that happened around in the early 1950s? Or are you going to tell us that NK developed amnesia?
Again, you didn't answer the question.
And if it were about the korean war why not start it, oh say, around the time of the korean war? Why wait until 1965? You're grasping for straws here cath and it's looking a little pathetic.
To be fair, If you had sticks and stones, and your potential enemies had guns, you would want guns.
Particularly if one of your enemies had, quite unnecessarily, wiped out a 100 thousand people with those guns in your area of the world not so long ago
Voted : They did it because they wanted nukes for their own sake
Lovelynice- "that was still after the Korean War started right, a war which never officially ended, and so North Korea and the USA are still technically at war and hostile since 1953."
Cathexis- "Also, have you forgotten a little event that happened around in the early 1950s? Or are you going to tell us that NK developed amnesia?"
jyl- "we were fighting long before this,
we're actually still at war with them."
- Okay, the Korean War? Let us look at the facts of history. Yes, there was a Korean war. Why was there a Korean war? Because North Korea was aggressive- it invaded South Korea- the United States joined the war on teh DEFENSIVE to aid one of its allies. Bringing up the Korean War DOES NOT help the argument that North Korea is a regime that is provocative because it feels threatened. The fact is, North korea was the aggressor of the Korean War. Reminding us about the Korean War is merely to remind us that North Korea is an aggressive state and that it has a history of being provocative not because it was on a defensive, but rather that it was on the offensive. To imply that they started their nuclear weapons programme as a result of the Korean War? Well, since the Korean War itself was initiated out of North Korea being aggressive and on teh offensive, it would therefore seem that to argue that "North Korea started its nuclear program because of the Korean War" is to imply that it (North Korea) agressively went on teh offensive by invading South Korea and starting the Korean War- the USA had a defensive alliance to South Korea and out of loyalty helped the South Koreans DEFEND themselves- the North Koreans failed to take South Korea because technologically they were inferior- their solution therefore as a result was that they wanted nuclear weapons? Wouldn't that seem that therefore their desire for nuclear weapons was probably for assertive, and not defensive reasons? This country invaded another country, failed to conquer it as it had intended (because it was militarily and technologically inferior), and then afterward its failed attempt- its decision is an armistice and during this time it will seek nuclear weapons? Yes, it seems North Korea, even considering the Korean war, still remains to appear to be wanting nukes out of its own ambitions, and not as a result of American aggression. I find it shocking that some have linked the Korean War with 'American aggression'. The USA was not the aggressor in the Korean war, and nor was its ally, South Korea. The aggresor was North Korea.
|
