North korean and iranian nukes.

Brett Nortje · Dec 28, 2016

It has become inevitable that iran and north korea will get the things they need to construct nukes sooner or later. this whole mess started when they wanted to research them, and, they were sanctioned. soon, they will have nukes regardless of sanctions, and, this makes living hard for the people too, not the leaders, of course.

It is also inevitable that they will be able to call for lifting of sanctions due to their nukes. this means that there might be a new cold war of course. but, maybe now would be a good time to put a deal in place? what if they were to collaborate with the rest of the world into a huge nuclear conspiracy, one where they all need confirmation from their neighbors to launch them? america could go to mexico and canada, for example, and need confirmation from them to launch nukes or some destructive rubbish?

Now i want to ask, what is the good in launching nukes in self defense? this is where you are about to die, so you kill someone else? what a stupid idea. this is the biggest mess i have ever heard of, of course.

I vouch for the scrapping of all nukes, in an agreement where the world scraps all nukes, in accordance with a new resolution. of course, it will only work if everybody does it, and, there is 'military transparency.' and, why shouldn't there be - what is the point of being ready for war when you can avoid war altogether?

waltky · Dec 28, 2016

Brett wrote: this means that there might be a new cold war of course.

The Middle East Nuclear Race Is Already Under Way
March 23, 2015 - While the U.S. and other world powers work to constrain Iran's nuclear program, five rival nations plan atomic programs

One of the most important reasons why the U.S. is trying to conclude a nuclear deal with Iran is to prevent an Iranian bomb from triggering a nuclear race in the Middle East. Yet even as talks continue now in Switzerland, Tehran’s regional rivals have already begun quietly acting on their own atomic ambitions. Nuclear power may be on the wane almost everywhere else in the world, but it’s all the rage in the place with all that oil. Egypt’s announcement last month that it was hiring Russia to build a reactor near Alexandria made it only the latest entrant in an emerging atomic derby. Every other major Sunni power in the region has announced similar plans. And though none appear either as ambitious nor as ambiguous as what’s taken place in Iran — which set out to master the entire atomic-fuel cycle, a red flag for a military program — each announcement lays down a marker in a region that, until recently, was notable as the one place on the planet where governments had made little progress on nuclear power.

With the exception of Israel, which has never publicly acknowledged its widely known nuclear arsenal, no Middle Eastern country beyond Iran had a nuclear program — peaceful or otherwise — until the wealthy United Arab Emirates began building a reactor in July 2012 (due for completion in 2017). The list now includes, in addition to Egypt, Turkey, Jordan and Saudi Arabia — the last Iran’s archrival, and which last year revealed plans to build 16 nuclear plants over the next two decades. When the President of South Korea — which has 23 nuclear plants of its own — visited the Kingdom earlier this month, leaders of both countries signed a memo of understanding calling for Seoul to build two of the nuclear plants. The Saudis have made similar arrangements with China, Argentina and France. “It’s not just because nuclear power is seen as a first step toward a nuclear-weapons option,” says Mark Fitzpatrick, a former U.S. State Department nuclear expert who now runs the nonproliferation and disarmament program at London’s International Institute for Strategic Studies. “There is also a prestige factor: keeping up with the neighbors.”

Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif, and the head of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, Ali Akbar Salehi, talk with aides after a morning negotiation session with U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry over Iran's nuclear program in Lausanne, Switzerland, on March 19, 2015

Middle Eastern nations may have legitimate reasons to invest in nuclear energy. Jordan, for instance, has almost no oil in liquid form, and almost less water. Saudi Arabia and the UAE possess huge crude reserves, but lose potential export revenue when they burn oil at home to create electricity — huge amounts of which are sucked up by desalination plants. Turkey, despite impressive hydroelectric potential, must import oil and natural gas. But all that has been true for decades. What’s changed in recent years is the nuclear capabilities of Iran — a Shi‘ite Muslim country Sunni leaders have come to regard as major threat. Jordan’s King Abdullah II famously warned of a “Shia crescent” of Iran-aligned countries reaching from the Mediterranean to the Persian Gulf. The Saudis have made it clear that they will acquire a nuclear weapon should Iran get one. “This is not the shortest way to a nuclear weapon, by any means,” says Sharon Squassoni, director of the proliferation-prevention program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, D.C. “But if I put myself in their shoes, I’d think it probably makes sense to start down this path to see if we can develop a civilian nuclear [program], and if we pick up some capabilities along the way, that’s all right.”‘

Suspicion rises with every new announcement partly because the Middle East is bucking a global trend. Worldwide, the number of nuclear plants has declined since the meltdown at Japan’s Fukushima Daiichi plant in 2011. Reactions differed by country. Germany forswore nuclear energy altogether after the disaster, while China pressed ahead, planning more than 100 new reactors. But in most places, the environmental risks and high costs have turned countries off nuclear power. “My beef with nuclear energy is that it’s sort of held up as this very prestigious thing,” Squassoni tells TIME. “We do nuclear deals with our best allies … all this stuff about strategic partnership. And really, it’s this extremely expensive, complicated, slightly dangerous way to boil water. And that’s what you’re doing, right? You’re boiling water to turn those turbines.”

MORE
Click to expand...

Note the date - the ME nuclear arms race has already been goin' on.

ArmySoldier · Dec 28, 2016

Brett Nortje said: ↑

It has become inevitable that iran and north korea will get the things they need to construct nukes sooner or later. this whole mess started when they wanted to research them, and, they were sanctioned. soon, they will have nukes regardless of sanctions, and, this makes living hard for the people too, not the leaders, of course.

It is also inevitable that they will be able to call for lifting of sanctions due to their nukes. this means that there might be a new cold war of course. but, maybe now would be a good time to put a deal in place? what if they were to collaborate with the rest of the world into a huge nuclear conspiracy, one where they all need confirmation from their neighbors to launch them? america could go to mexico and canada, for example, and need confirmation from them to launch nukes or some destructive rubbish?

Now i want to ask, what is the good in launching nukes in self defense? this is where you are about to die, so you kill someone else? what a stupid idea. this is the biggest mess i have ever heard of, of course.

I vouch for the scrapping of all nukes, in an agreement where the world scraps all nukes, in accordance with a new resolution. of course, it will only work if everybody does it, and, there is 'military transparency.' and, why shouldn't there be - what is the point of being ready for war when you can avoid war altogether?
Click to expand...

We could just carpet bomb Iran into the ground. I've never worried about North Korea.

Brett Nortje · Dec 28, 2016

Another thing to observe about nuclear capacity is that it makes you 'watched.' if your allies have nukes, do you need them? if iran and north korea and russia are allies, and russia has nukes, then there is no need for concern, is there?

Here is the catch; if the united states president can launch nukes quickly, he must do it through 'the net.' the net can be hacked, yes? on the other hand, if they were to have a hands on telephone wire to the nukes, then there would be more security, but voice synthesizers could be used. there really is no security with this type of thing, is there?

Log in or Sign up

North korean and iranian nukes.

Brett Nortje Well-Known Member

waltky Well-Known Member

ArmySoldier Well-Known Member Past Donor

Brett Nortje Well-Known Member

Share This Page

Log in or Sign up

North korean and iranian nukes.

Brett Nortje Well-Known Member

waltky Well-Known Member

ArmySoldier Well-Known Member Past Donor

Brett Nortje Well-Known Member

Share This Page

Useful Searches