North Korea says it successfully tested hydrogen bomb for long-range missile

[themickey]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/north-korea-apparently-conducts-another-nuclear-test-south-korea-says/2017/09/03/7bce3ff6-905b-11e7-8df5-c2e5cf46c1e2_story.html?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_nkoreatest-1230am:homepage/story&utm_term=.422192a56aad

http://edition.cnn.com/2017/09/03/a...630449686d6a@livefyre.com&hubRefSrc=permalink

 

[lawrence-lugar]

I must be dumb and naive on foreign relations and stuff,

But isn't all of this hypocritical...the US, and China and Russia are allowed to have their nuclear weapons...but when a new, emerging power decides to develop and test theirs...it becomes illegal for them to do so,...?

 

[themickey]

Expecting markets to rattle when the working week begins, not sure what will happen to gold, possibly up again...?
NK continually attempting to tighten the thumb screws on Donald, wonder if he can contain himself or will he spit the dummy?

 

[TreeFrogTrader]

I must be dumb and naive on foreign relations and stuff,

But isn't all of this hypocritical...the US, and China and Russia are allowed to have their nuclear weapons...but when a new, emerging power decides to develop and test theirs...it becomes illegal for them to do so,...?

Russia and China did not say that the first thing they were going to do was destroy another country when they got the bomb.

Iran and North Korea have both said that is their definite plan.

Also- call them crazy and grumpy- but Japan need not necessarily agree to North Korea testing their program in Japanese waters. Funny how that pisses some people off. Why dont they just lighten up a bit.

 

[CaptainObvious]

I must be dumb and naive on foreign relations and stuff,

But isn't all of this hypocritical...the US, and China and Russia are allowed to have their nuclear weapons...but when a new, emerging power decides to develop and test theirs...it becomes illegal for them to do so,...?

I tend to agree. The message which needs to be sent is that if said country becomes what we consider an imminent threat, we will then launch a full scale nuclear strike against that country. Until then, do as your conscious guides you. Either we have confidence in our defense systems, or we don't. If not, then why? Either we have the stones to launch a strike if threatened, or we don't. If not, that questioned needs to be answered as well, and in a very public way.

 

[vanzandt]

I tend to agree. The message which needs to be sent is that if said country becomes what we consider an imminent threat, we will then launch a full scale nuclear strike against that country.

Yeah... but its that retaliatory that kinda sucks.
Also, in the case of N. Korea... what if they say "we're taking over S Korea and if you try to stop us, we launch 20 nukes on North America".
Then what do we do?

One would like to believe we can easily shoot down ICBM's in flight; I don't think in reality thats the case, especially against multiple targets.

Its a lose lose.
The Pentagon knows this.

And unless we have technology ready to go that can in fact neutralize multiple warheads in space... the fat boy needs to be stopped ASAP or his "having us over a barrel" like he does now with conventional weapons... will be the exact same thing, only on a nuclear level. We can't have that.

 

[TreeFrogTrader]

Yeah... but its that retaliatory that kinda sucks.
Also, in the case of N. Korea... what if they say "we're taking over S Korea and if you try to stop us, we launch 20 nukes on North America".
Then what do we do?

One would like to believe we can easily shoot down ICBM's in flight; I don't think in reality thats the case, especially against multiple targets.

Its a lose lose.
The Pentagon knows this.

And unless we have technology ready to go that can in fact neutralize multiple warheads in space... the fat boy needs to be stopped ASAP or his "having us over a barrel" like he does now with conventional weapons... will be the exact same thing, only on a nuclear level. We can't have that.

There are tremendous risks to kicking the can down the road more and more. He has some nuke capability but it is not clear that he can deliver it. Give him another eight years of a free pass as he got under Obama and he 100% will be able to deliver it. He doesnt need eight years to get there either. A full out embargo or sanction program will hurt the country badly but Iran will supply the leadership with whatever they need. Everyone else is expendable.
China is 100% dicking around. They are backing north korea. They will side with us on a few things but they are just gaming us so that Fat Boy will keep us preoccupied while they continue to develop their military and occupy the south china sea.

 

[Tony Stark]

I feel so relieved that conservatives elected a pathological lying con man pussy grabbing reality show host to handle this.

 

[CaptainObvious]

Yeah... but its that retaliatory that kinda sucks.
Also, in the case of N. Korea... what if they say "we're taking over S Korea and if you try to stop us, we launch 20 nukes on North America".
Then what do we do?

One would like to believe we can easily shoot down ICBM's in flight; I don't think in reality thats the case, especially against multiple targets.

Its a lose lose.
The Pentagon knows this.

And unless we have technology ready to go that can in fact neutralize multiple warheads in space... the fat boy needs to be stopped ASAP or his "having us over a barrel" like he does now with conventional weapons... will be the exact same thing, only on a nuclear level. We can't have that.

All depends how we define imminent threat. IMO there doesn't have to be a first strike by them to have an imminent threat. In your scenario, immediately after the NK saying they're taking over SK, that would satisfy the imminent threat. Bye-bye NK. Far as I'm concerned we're right at the imminent threat level today. Sanctions haven't and won't work. Some decisions are tougher than other, this is one of those decisions. Millions will die. Waiting means hundreds of millions will die.

 

[Tony Stark]

All depends how we define imminent threat. IMO there doesn't have to be a first strike by them to have an imminent threat. In your scenario, immediately after the NK saying they're taking over SK, that would satisfy the imminent threat. Bye-bye NK. Far as I'm concerned we're right at the imminent threat level today. Sanctions haven't and won't work. Some decisions are tougher than other, this is one of those decisions. Millions will die. Waiting means hundreds of millions will die.

Wonder if you would feel the same if you were in SK along with the 30,000 US troops there.Most US war hawks pressing for The US to attack NK do so because they know SK and Japan will be the recipient of NK's nuclear counter attack.China has said they will defend NK if The US strikes NK first so don't feel to safe because their nukes can reach The US now.