North Korea detonates it's first Hydrogen Nuclear Bomb

Printable View

03-09-2017, 10:49 PM
-:Undertaker:-

North Korea detonates it's first Hydrogen Nuclear Bomb

Tremor is detected in North Korea, raising fears it has conducted another nuclear test https://t.co/Ilrz7dqMTw
— BBC Breaking News (@BBCBreaking) September 3, 2017

South Korea is finding, as I have told them, that their talk of appeasement with North Korea will not work, they only understand one thing!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 3, 2017
I am against preventative war in most cases, however this country has been making very real threats to various nations and its words are followed by actions of developing the H-bomb and ICBMs. President Trump is right. The time to act - I am talking about South Korea and Japan - is now or never. And the never option means South Korea and Japan developing their own nuclear weapons and a new Cold War arising in South East Asia.

I still say that the time for South Korea and Japan to ratchet it up will be the next time North Korea hits a naval ship or shells an island. That's the time to strike back very hard - and take it from there. An ideal excuse.

Thoughts?
04-09-2017, 02:11 AM
Stephen

Lol everytime I look at the pics of him I can't stop thinking about the "can i eat it" memes

yummy hydrogen bomb

http://i.imgur.com/vRZ8rgE.jpg
04-09-2017, 02:13 AM
-:Undertaker:-

@Stephen;

I just automatically think of Team America whenever I see him. :P
04-09-2017, 12:39 PM
scottish

It's been the same crap for months now, everyone thinking Trump's going to do something then he tweets and does nothing for a few weeks.

About time someone kicked something off.
04-09-2017, 05:56 PM
dbgtz

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UxF10IYOMCo

pretty sure the Japanese have restrictions in place from WW2 and both countries are basically just US outposts.
worth also bearing in mind 120kt isn't even a lot by modern standards (Trident II is 475kt). There's also arguably more to a bomb than the explosion output, too.

still don't really see the end goal in a war
04-09-2017, 06:36 PM
RuthlessSlayer-

Man honestly WW3 is about to start. The shit that's currently happening is wildddd
05-09-2017, 09:13 AM
AgnesIO

Just to clarify, this is the same Trump that reckoned he could "talk" to Kim Jong-un during the election? That he could simply chat it out with the guy?

He's right that talking with NK won't work - just not going to forget his sheer arrogance during the election, either!
11-09-2017, 11:38 PM
dbgtz

also the same Trump who called Obama lazy then constantly plays golf
got to love it
https://www.reddit.com/r/TrumpCriticizesTrump/
14-09-2017, 10:49 PM
-:Undertaker:-

North Korea fires another ICBM just now.

MORE: Missile launched from North Korea entered and left Japanese airspace in two minutes, landed 2,000 kms east of Cape Erimo, NHK reports
— NBC News (@NBCNews) September 14, 2017
Response should be to fire two missiles back over North Korean airspace.
15-09-2017, 12:31 AM
Neversoft

Quote:

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

The time to act - I am talking about South Korea and Japan - is now or never.

Right old armchair warrior, aren't you. Japan will never develop nuclear weapons.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dbgtz

pretty sure the Japanese have restrictions in place from WW2 and both countries are basically just US outposts.

They don't. Japan's sovereignty was restored many decades ago. Also, to describe two of the most affluent nations on the planet as 'basically just US outposts' is comical.

Quote:

Originally Posted by RuthlessSlayer-

Man honestly WW3 is about to start. The shit that's currently happening is wildddd

I've seen this thrown around a lot on the internet, but it's hardly World War III if North Korea is the only enemy.
15-09-2017, 02:37 AM
-:Undertaker:-

Quote:

Originally Posted by Neversoft

Right old armchair warrior, aren't you. Japan will never develop nuclear weapons.

Better an armchair warrior than a knock off mystic meg.

Not that I even said Japan would develop nuclear weapons but it is widely known that Japan has the capacity, with nuclear material and technology, to develop nuclear weapons in a very short space of time should it ever need to much in the same way that Saudi Arabia has a secret-but-not-so-secret deal with Pakistan to purchase nuclear weapons in the event of Iran developing them.

Geopolitics can change very quickly. If America ever waivers in the Orient, then Japan will go nuclear. If I were Japanese myself, I would advocate an independent nuclear arsenal anyway from the perspective that it is never a good idea to outsource your defence.
15-09-2017, 10:00 AM
dbgtz

Quote:

Originally Posted by Neversoft

They don't. Japan's sovereignty was restored many decades ago. Also, to describe two of the most affluent nations on the planet as 'basically just US outposts' is comical.

Perhaps a slight exaggeration to call them outposts, but the US does have a relatively large military influence in Japan.
Technically article 9 of their constitution does forbid a military and also the ability to wage war. So yes, they are limited in regards to an "outward" military and by the looks of it, some even think the JSDF are in breach.
15-09-2017, 11:33 AM
Neversoft

Quote:

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

Better an armchair warrior than a knock off mystic meg.

Aren't you both?

Quote:

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

If America ever waivers in the Orient, then Japan will go nuclear.

Is this a fact, is it?

Quote:

Originally Posted by -:Undertaker:-

If I were Japanese myself, I would advocate an independent nuclear arsenal anyway from the perspective that it is never a good idea to outsource your defence.

No. If you were Japanese, you would be an entirely different person. You're speaking as a Briton who thinks this is what Japan should do.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dbgtz

Perhaps a slight exaggeration to call them outposts, but the US does have a relatively large military influence in Japan.
Technically article 9 of their constitution does forbid a military and also the ability to wage war. So yes, they are limited in regards to an "outward" military and by the looks of it, some even think the JSDF are in breach.

I can read Wikipedia, too. Although the Constitution came into effect following the war, it is something which the US has no control of. Any 'restrictions' today are entirely self-imposed, and they are by no means forbidden to wage war (only to involve themselves in international conflicts), and the SDF is a military. The 'some' you refer to is an outdated quote, since new legislation was pushed through following the correct channels two years ago. The constitution was amended.

The US has several military bases in Japan, but I would certainly not describe them as an 'influence' — strange choice of word. The US has a military presence around the world, even in the UK. As for South Korea, their own army is more than ten times the size of ours. They still employ conscription and mandatory service. The US military bases in those countries are just a droplet compared to their own forces. The only bases in Japan which are constantly scrutinised are the ones in Okinawa, which are seen as an oppressive and unwanted presence due to their size and proximity, given how small the island is.
15-09-2017, 05:26 PM
dbgtz

Quote:

Originally Posted by Neversoft

I can read Wikipedia, too. Although the Constitution came into effect following the war, it is something which the US has no control of. Any 'restrictions' today are entirely self-imposed, and they are by no means forbidden to wage war (only to involve themselves in international conflicts), and the SDF is a military. The 'some' you refer to is an outdated quote, since new legislation was pushed through following the correct channels two years ago. The constitution was amended.

The US has several military bases in Japan, but I would certainly not describe them as an 'influence' — strange choice of word. The US has a military presence around the world, even in the UK. As for South Korea, their own army is more than ten times the size of ours. They still employ conscription and mandatory service. The US military bases in those countries are just a droplet compared to their own forces. The only bases in Japan which are constantly scrutinised are the ones in Okinawa, which are seen as an oppressive and unwanted presence due to their size and proximity, given how small the island is.

I mean, if you can read Wikipedia then you would have been the mention of constitutional ambiguity about the JSDF which is aimed to be amended in 2020 (https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/20...-constitution/). Article 9 still very much there: http://japan.kantei.go.jp/constituti.../frame_01.html.
I also wasn't saying the US had control of their constitution, but it should be fairly obvious an "occupied" Japan would have had some US/allies influence or pressure.

Also yes the US does have a military presence around the world I know, but if you look at the number of US troops on foreign soil, their presence in Japan is the largest (http://uk.businessinsider.com/us-mil...17-3?r=US&IR=T). Not really sure why you seem to suggest that they have no influence because they have troops everywhere. If anything, it suggests to me the scope of their influence. I'm also not really sure why you're suggesting that, because only a few thousand troops are present, that it shows no influence? We should also bear in mind that modern militaries are more than the number of soldiers at this point.
15-09-2017, 05:59 PM
Neversoft

Quote:

Originally Posted by dbgtz

I also wasn't saying the US had control of their constitution, but it should be fairly obvious an "occupied" Japan would have had some US/allies influence or pressure.

Well, you kind of did, by saying they have restrictions in place from World War II, which was over seventy years ago. Japan is a sovereign nation — has been for a very long time — and is in control of its own laws and practices. Pure and simple. I'm not trying to debate and altercate, but what you said was wrong.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dbgtz

Also yes the US does have a military presence around the world I know, but if you look at the number of US troops on foreign soil, their presence in Japan is the largest (http://uk.businessinsider.com/us-mil...17-3?r=US&IR=T). Not really sure why you seem to suggest that they have no influence because they have troops everywhere. If anything, it suggests to me the scope of their influence. I'm also not really sure why you're suggesting that, because only a few thousand troops are present, that it shows no influence? We should also bear in mind that modern militaries are more than the number of soldiers at this point.

Tell me, then, how are these US bases influencing Japan? Are you telling me they have an input in the running of the country? Do they have a place within the government? To what extent are they involved? Let's also not ignore the fact that you called Japan "a US outpost," which is by definition 'a small military camp positioned away from the main army,' and now you're telling me their presence is substantial enough to influence a country? Which is it?
15-09-2017, 08:49 PM
-:Undertaker:-

Quote:

Originally Posted by Neversoft

Is this a fact, is it?

Why yes, yes it is.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wikipedia

While there are currently no known plans in Japan to produce nuclear weapons, it has been argued Japan has the technology, raw materials, and the capital to produce nuclear weapons within one year if necessary, and many analysts consider it a de facto nuclear state for this reason. For this reason Japan is often said to be a "screwdriver's turn" away from possessing nuclear weapons, or to possess a "bomb in the basement".

Japan was reported in 2012 to have 9 tonnes of plutonium in Japan, enough for more than 1,000 nuclear warheads, and an additional 35 tonnes stored in Europe.

In 2011, former Minister of Defense Shigeru Ishiba explicitly backed the idea of Japan maintaining the capability of nuclear latency:

"I don't think Japan needs to possess nuclear weapons, but it's important to maintain our commercial reactors because it would allow us to produce a nuclear warhead in a short amount of time ... It's a tacit nuclear deterrent"

Key pillar of Japanese security is American backing and pivot East policy. Should that ever waiver or disappear then Japan is well prepared to assemble nuclear weapons in no time at all - and will do. That isn't by accident either, it is by design.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Neversoft

No. If you were Japanese, you would be an entirely different person. You're speaking as a Briton who thinks this is what Japan should do.

No, i'm speaking in regards to future geopolitics and realpolitik.
15-09-2017, 09:19 PM
Neversoft

Christ. I can't even take you seriously. God have mercy on your soul, because you're a real loony.
15-09-2017, 11:51 PM
dbgtz

Quote:

Originally Posted by Neversoft

Well, you kind of did, by saying they have restrictions in place from World War II, which was over seventy years ago. Japan is a sovereign nation — has been for a very long time — and is in control of its own laws and practices. Pure and simple. I'm not trying to debate and altercate, but what you said was wrong.

Self imposed restrictions then :P

Quote:

Tell me, then, how are these US bases influencing Japan? Are you telling me they have an input in the running of the country? Do they have a place within the government? To what extent are they involved? Let's also not ignore the fact that you called Japan "a US outpost," which is by definition 'a small military camp positioned away from the main army,' and now you're telling me their presence is substantial enough to influence a country? Which is it?

I'm not suggesting the bases themselves have influence over Japan, rather it just indicates some degree of influence. The US is a large country (obviously) who has their fingers in many pies and I'm sure Japan gets something out of the arrangement.
I wasn't trying to imply that Japan is under their thumb, but you can't deny US influence on Japan in many ways. Not to say the reverse isn't try to some degree. However, should Japan initiate a war (which I'm sure won't happen), then I can't imagine the US being particularly happy without some degree of consultation. Obviously I was wrong to call them outposts, but I can imagine it's a rather complex set up.
16-09-2017, 10:12 AM
Neversoft

Quote:

Originally Posted by dbgtz

Self imposed restrictions then :P

I'm not suggesting the bases themselves have influence over Japan, rather it just indicates some degree of influence. The US is a large country (obviously) who has their fingers in many pies and I'm sure Japan gets something out of the arrangement.
I wasn't trying to imply that Japan is under their thumb, but you can't deny US influence on Japan in many ways. Not to say the reverse isn't try to some degree. However, should Japan initiate a war (which I'm sure won't happen), then I can't imagine the US being particularly happy without some degree of consultation. Obviously I was wrong to call them outposts, but I can imagine it's a rather complex set up.

Fair enough. I agree Japan must be getting something out of it, but I think it's also partly the nature of the US. Even before Trump, who is famously outspoken, Obama went and dipped his fingers in Brexit. America likes to be in charge, even when they have no actual power or jurisdiction to change anything. I think this is slowly changing, though. Especially in South Korea, which had a devious relationship with the US from the Korean War up until it's democratisation, but now you mostly have Trump running his mouth telling people what they should do. However, I think most outside influence is purely perceived — the real politics happens in a shady back room.