We have nuclear weaponry and refuse to give them up. The US has nuclear weapons and not only refuses to give them up but has actually used them to kill hundreds of thousands of innocent people. But both countries are crying like little kids because North Korea dares to want nuclear weapons.
Fair point, though I don't recall us ever threatening to use them on anybody. Personally, I think that Kom Jong-Un's threats are just a load of willy waving. So far. Having said that, I reckon he is fairly unhinged.
Merde did the present defence secretary Michael Fallon not recently say that Mrs May would have no hesitation of making the first strike. That to me is a bit of a threat.
On a more serious note, does their population still believe that their football team got to the semis in South Africa and do they still only get the choice of 4 different hairstyles?
Where to start?? ".....actually used them to kill hundreds of thousands of innocent people" It was different era 70+ years ago after losses on all sides that nowadays would be unacceptable . It is only a matter of conjecture, but it was argued that a prolonged invasion of the Japanese islands could have resulted in many more casualties both military and civilian. In hindsight, it may well have been that the Japanese would have capitulated sooner. Furthermore radiation sickness and cancer links were unknowns at the time. Now we look back on it as an extreme and barbaric act but at the time it was regarded as a means to shorten a prolonged and bloody war. Whilst there is more than one argument for pros and cons, the general consensus is the risk of nuclear or biological attacks increases exponentially each time a new state gains access to nuclear or biological weapons. Nuclear free world is a pipe dream since the genie is out of the bottle but as long as stable regimes (I know we can debate Trump all day long) but China US and Russia have had the weapons long enough to know that anyone of them pushing the button against one or other of the superstates assures total annihilation (MAD). However unstable regimes such as NK and other states like Iran gaining Nuclear weapons not only increases the chance of conflict but the chance that they may end up in the hands of terrorist organisations such as IS. It is ridiculous to suggest it is hypocritical that those with nuclear weapons seek to prevent states without nuclear weapons having them Most states who have renounced them also do not want proliferation for the reasons stated above. Do you really compare Russia, China, France and UK with NK when it comes to the potential risk of a pre-emptive nuclear launch?
He certainly did, in relation to Russia in fact. Definite willy waving. As if the UK would ever make a pre-emptive strike on Russia.
Well we have very recent history of invading centuries and killing many thousands as does America. Do north Korea invade many countries?
So you are in the "let's voluntarily give up our nuclear weapons" camp. That's really seems to be all you're saying. Fair enough. Good luck with that.
I have no strong opinion on nuclear weapons either way but it is the greatest of hypocrisy to stop others having them. What's good for one and all that. Sent from my iPad using Barnsley FC BBS Fans Forum
We m more scared of Donald Trump then the tiny Korean. Sent from my iPad using Barnsley FC BBS Fan Forum mobile app
You may think that. I'm happier knowing that superior conventional forces wielded by aggressors will not result in our invasion and capitulation. Because of our ability to nuke them!