North Korea

Why are people not concerned that many countries are increasing their nuclear arsenals even though they have signed a non-proliferation treaty?

The whole world was terrified after the Bay of Pigs incident, thinking the world was going to come to an end after the Cuban missile crisis.
How come people are so relaxed about trump and North Korea?

Sunseeker, it doesn't matter why a megalomaniac is in charge of any country if he's a megalomaniac, does it?

Both trump and Kim Jung un are threatening each other's countries.

Our Trident failed in a test off the coast of Florida, and we were not told about it for ages.Mike Pence has just said that the failed test of North Korea is seen as a threat.

Off out now. Hope to get back.

It's call Mutually Assured Destruction - M.A.D. an apt acronym if ever there was one.

Trump uses twitter to communicate his thoughts and we do not know whether those thoughts have been filtered through his advisors before they go global. The fact that he does not realise how dangerous "twitter diplomacy" is is enough reason to fear him. He appears to have no concept whatever of rational thoughtful responses in the face of such danger as we all now face.

Watching the news reports from NK it is very clear that the population has been brainwashed into a culture of fear of other nations and the accumulation of weapons of all kinds seems simply logical. We can do little about that.

I share dj's wish that the production of weapons should stop, but also Nellie's recognition that the genie is out and turning the clock back is not an option.

However, I do think that we as a nation could do our small part by stopping production and trade in arms. We cannot criticise other nations (however unstable their leaders) and insist that they rein in their production if we too are engaged in this mucky business.

We have these fears as well, Mawbroon.
That's why we feel the need for Trident, isn't it?
If we have Trident, other countries will not drop their bombs on us?
Otherwise why spend so much on replacing it?

dj like you I would like to see every country give up its nuclear weapons and an end to arms dealing but I'm afraid I have to agree with Abonet that isn't going to happen. As for NK it is being run by a meglomaniac who has been indulged from a child - he is in charge because his father and grandfather were before him, not because of any democratic election.

To dj The theory is great, but in practice HOW would you stop Kim Jong etc having nuclear weapons if they have decided that they want them?

To Abonet HOW would you restrict a war over the Pacific from spilling over to the Atlantic? HOW could you keep the fallout from a nuclear attack by/on USA/NK from spreading right round the globe?

And a universal question - WHAT has happened to the minds of people in so many different parts of the world that they prefer to wars to peace amd bombastic aggressive dictators to reasoning statesmen?

North Korea withdrew from the treaty in 2003.
Only four countries have not signed it, and three of those countries have nuclear weapons, India, Pakistan and Israel.

Which country do you think trump should threaten next?
South Sudan hasn't signed. Perhaps they should be tried out for his megalomaniac tendencies.

I am unclear as to who would be minded to launch a nuclear attack on N Korea anyway.
S Korea is too close and has its own agenda regarding trade, economic development.
China also has another agenda and I could not see them regarding N Korea as a threat. Why should a N Korean woman have these fears unless government propaganda is fuelling them?

So, Abonet, you are justifying every country having nuclear weapons. Is that really what you want?

Nuclear weapons can be decommissioned. ALL nuclear weapons can be decommissioned.
All countries with nuclear weapons have signed the non pproliferation treaty, but they are not decommissioning them. They are producing fewer but more powerful weapons.
Personally those who think that is okay are the ones who worry me.
I'll carry on being naive.

Trump is not a psychopath? Lots of people beg to differ.
How many psychopaths does it take to start a nuclear war?
Only one, whose weapons can reach here and the USA.

And that is the end of the conversation because reality is not your choice.
Are you saying "Sorry, I dont care" about nuclear weapons falling on North Korea if they stopped doing their nuclear weapons?
Imagine the fear of the North Korean woman.

Do you really think it's a good idea for us to replace Trident with more American nuclear missiles?
Personally, I don't mind if we spend all that money on the people in this country rather than what everyone hopes will be an imaginary war.

The problem is that you can't un-invent weapons nuclear or otherwise anymore than you can un-invent the wheel or antibiotics or anything else come to that, and once the geni is out of the bottle there is no way that it can be put back. Therefore worldwide disarmament is totally unrealistic and frankly naive. Yes we do have nuclear weapons as a deterrent, the difference between us and NK is that their leader is a psychopath, and driven by his ecstatic, hysterical, terrified population, whereas our leaders maybe lots of things, but they're not psychopaths.

Sorry, I don't care. I want all countries to give up their nuclear weapons, and their MOABs, etc.

I am a member of CND, CAAT and StopWar. Just in case you are a really new member and do not know.
I am sure you will SOON get it.

We have our proxy war and test our weapons in the middle east. So did America until recently.
Now trump wants to take on someone who has absolute power and megalomania like himself?
I hope they conduct that war over the Pacific and not over Europe.

Ok. Lets say North Korea abandons its nuclear weapons.
Is the North Korean woman right? "Other countries nuclear weapons will fall on our land".

The other post.
You cant dictate what he does. And nor can I.

No matter how fearful you are, reality has to kick in.

Nobody should have nuclear weapons. I think you should have sussed out by now that I think that.

aljazeera.us2.list-manage.com/track/click?u=38ffd892c93e55497901185c8&id=40138d6895&e=7cecddd9cf

In answer to your last but one post.

So should North Korea have nuclear weapons?

Okay, so let's have a few nuclear bombs exploded. That'll teach other countries, won't it?
The bomb on Hiroshima was dropped on my mother's 24th birthday. My father was fighting in Burma.
Two of the three nuclear bombs tested by Kim Jung un have been more powerful than that bomb.
Where do you suggest he tests the next one, as USA aitcraft carriers are situated off the coast of South Korea.
Do let us know what exactly you would do.

•" Asked on BBC news whether her country needed nuclear weapons, a North Korean woman said: “If we do not have nuclear weapons, other countries’ nuclear weapons will fall on our land.” This sounded paranoid – until one reflected that Britain has exactly the same policy."

Your last link.
In reality, most conflicts down the ages have been "resolved" by both havent they?
Some by diplomacy and some by war.

Your first link.
I have never understood why a country going to war increases the popularity of the person ordering it.

And yes, there may be a nuclear bomb exploded.
But none of that takes away from what I have posted concerning reality versus the opposite.