Welcome to Gaia! ::

I'm just curious how everyone else feels about it?


This is pretty much my opinion on the subject.

Monday, in my sociology/interaction between cultures class, we were talking about it a little bit. My teacher said that she wasn't scared of the North Koreans so much, because their missiles couldn't reach us anyways. Instead, she said she was afraid that Bush was going to pull an Iraq again.

Honestly? I think he should. But, so far, from what I've read, he actually sounds like he has no interest in doing so.

Actually, I don't think that Bush should, exactly. I think the UN should. It's one case where, since we are in no direct danger and there's no specific danger that I know of to other countries (Except S. Korea), and there's no specific mistreatment of the people in the country, I don't think we should go all commando. But come on. One of the UN member countries specifically went against what every other country in the world told them to do, including their Commie sister country China. One of the most tight-fisted dictators, whose father is worshipped as a god in his country, and the worship is starting to spread to him, just got nukes. Sure, he can't hit -us- with them yet. But what's going to stop him from nuking the hell out of S. Korea? Or anywhere else he doesn't like?

I really don't know how N. Korea feels about other countries, but I wouldn't imagine that they enjoy having friendly tea parties with them, considering that -everyone- was telling N. Korea not to do this, and they did this anyways. I mean, Switzerland condemns them for God's sake!

Anyways, what are ya'll's opinions on this?

I guess I'm the one who differs in opinion.

I personally feel North Korea has every right to get nuclear weapons. Unless every country disarms, no country should have the right to tell other countries not to do something like this.

It's a double standard... the U.S. can have nukes but North Korea can't?

Even if the nukes can reach U.S. shores, and I die, since I live on the west coast... I am still not afriad. For some reason, death is just something I have stopped fearing.

Hey man, you don't have to explain yourself like that, but it's all good. It's a controversial issue because nuke-control is kind of like gun control, either everyone has a right to own them, or no one does.

What I mean is, how can we say North Korea, a group with much different beliefs, has no right to have a nuke?

I do understand where you're coming from about fearing death for others, but to me, though it's just a cycle of life, I find it is much different than a life or death struggle.

It's more of a stance against ethnocentricism.

Well I have to disagree, the US is far more responsible than North Korea when it comes to..... basically everything. I mean seriously, North Korea kills its citizens by the thousands(millions?), and uses fear based diplomacy. Most of its revenue is from counterfiet and drug trade. They are also one of the poorest nations on earth, with relatively little to lose and much to gain.
Although I still do not believe North Korea has nukes, I'm just saying in the hypothetical sense.

Haha, ah well, I was close to getting it.

I do agree that no country should ever have nuclear weapons, but since the world is imperfect... there's nothing we can do.

Here the only argument I can make is that the US is only more responsible with international affairs.

North Korea is responsible for itself as a nation, and though we may not agree with their beliefs, or their regimin, or anything with them, unless we're willing to go to war, we really can't do anything.

xd You mean the comic?

As for your real post... I could see that, yeah. But only in a situation like that, where, if we didn't use the nukes, we would be under the Commie regime in a couple of years. Never as a first blow, never as part of standard warfare, but only as a very last resort.

That's not what I'm trying to say. You may have noticed, I said several times that -no one- should have nukes. However, since they are already out there, if we simply get rid of our nukes, what do we accomplish?

I'll tell you what; We succeed at making our country susceptible to nuclear attacks without them having any fear of substantial retribution.

It's like in Texas, having a shotgun in your house for protection. Do you ever want to shoot someone with that shotgun? Heavens no. But would you rather have that shotgun, and let it be known that you have that shotgun so that people stay away from your house, or be known as one of the few Texans who don't have a weapon in their house, and are, thus, ripe for the stealing?

I seriously can't understand why anyone would say, "Well, I don't believe in using nukes, but, since the US has nukes, we should just let every nation out there create nukes. Just because it's fair." Nothing's fair, and it's certainly not fair to the rest of the world to allow some dictator access to nuclear weapons.

And speaking of which, it's not just the US saying, "I get to have nukes, no one else does." In fact, there are several countries that are allowed to have nukes, US, Russia, China, France, Britain, Israel, India, and Pakistan, and some of the US' nuclear weapons in Belgium, the Netherlands, Italy, Germany, and Turkey for their protection, and no one else is allowed to because of the reasons already stated. Those nations that have nukes clearly are responsible with them, because nukes have only ever been used in combat twice, by anyone, and that was sixty years ago. And since then there have been bans -for everyone- on nuclear testing, which includes both the US and North Korea. But who knows how responsible a newly nuclear powered nation would be? They haven't proven themselves over a period of sixty years, how can they be trusted? Besides which, in order to start their own nuclear program, they have to test nukes (Like N. Korea did), which is -always- damaging the the environment in some way, even if it takes a while to show evidence.