Newbie to this Posted March 20, 2017 Report Share Posted March 20, 2017 The way that I see it America Russia China all have enough nuclear missiles to in affect destroy the civilized world but why would they want to do that its only small countries with nutters in charge like NK Isreal and England that are stupid enough to think that using them is a real option. Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't America use 2 atomic bombs? The only atomic/nuclear bombs ever used in anger. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zapp Posted March 20, 2017 Report Share Posted March 20, 2017 A lot of China's motivations come down to not wanting to have to deal with the aftermath of regime collapse in NK with millions of starving people and a sudden hard border with a staunch US ally. The trade off is that instead, a stable NK means lots of US interest and deployed forces nearby, which they also don't want. I certainly don't see NK being a catalyst for a war between the west and China. If that comes about it will be because of rising tensions in the south China Sea over the reclamation of the disputed reefs and shoals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeadWasp Posted March 21, 2017 Report Share Posted March 21, 2017 I've heard that SK fears the collapse of the regime in the north and millions of the indoctrinated unable to cope with the loss of their god figure. Apparently a lot of NK's who make it south either take to religion in a big way to fill the vacuum or just melt down and turn to crime. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hamster Posted March 21, 2017 Report Share Posted March 21, 2017 I bet what we think we know about NK is nothing like the truth, I wouldn't judge things based on our msm narratives. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
four-wheel-drive Posted March 21, 2017 Report Share Posted March 21, 2017 (edited) Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't America use 2 atomic bombs? The only atomic/nuclear bombs ever used in anger. There is a good argument to say that they only needed to drop one the point is they did dropped two on Japan but if Japan had the bomb to drop on the US would they have risked having one two three or more American cities destroyed somehow I doubt it. Edited March 21, 2017 by four-wheel-drive Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaptainBeaky Posted March 21, 2017 Report Share Posted March 21, 2017 I thought the whole point of dropping the two bombs was to demonstrate the nuclear capability to the Russians? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
achosenman Posted March 21, 2017 Report Share Posted March 21, 2017 AFAIA that was partly the reason. The Russians had torn up agreements made with the allies and there was a fear they would not be stopping at Berlin. The US had publicly stated that nothing less than unconditional surender from Japan would be acceptable, so painted themselves into a corner. Not forgetting the bloody lessons learned during the re-taking of various islands and the suicidal tendencies of the Japanese soldier. If I had to choose between the "big red button" or committing many thousands of my fellow countrymen to the meat grinder that taking Japan would have been, I would be mashing the button with both hands. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saddler Posted March 21, 2017 Report Share Posted March 21, 2017 The two bombs saved hundreds of thousands of lives, on both sides...and DID shorten the war. They had a third bomb ready.... Giving Uncle Joe a singed ego was very much secondary to stopping the Japanese resistance. It worked. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newbie to this Posted March 21, 2017 Report Share Posted March 21, 2017 I thought the whole point of dropping the two bombs was to demonstrate the nuclear capability to the Russians? This No real need, they could have just cut the supply routes and cut off the oil Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
digger Posted March 21, 2017 Report Share Posted March 21, 2017 They did cut the supply routes and Japan was out of oil. Any ship taking to the water was attacked. They resolutely refused unconditional surrender even after the first bomb. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manthing Posted March 21, 2017 Report Share Posted March 21, 2017 I do like this forum, I learn allsorts of stuff. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Danger-Mouse Posted March 21, 2017 Report Share Posted March 21, 2017 The two bombs saved hundreds of thousands of lives, on both sides...and DID shorten the war. They had a third bomb ready.... Giving Uncle Joe a singed ego was very much secondary to stopping the Japanese resistance. It worked. They did cut the supply routes and Japan was out of oil. Any ship taking to the water was attacked. They resolutely refused unconditional surrender even after the first bomb. Indeed. The Japanese were still very much in the Bushido code way of mind and would have fought any invasion with a fanatical mindset that dying was better than surrendering. The Americans had already seen the Japanese resolve on Iwa Jima etc and rightfully did not want to sacrifice many more thousands of their troops in an invasion of Japan. Although the devastation the bombs wrought, at the time and in the years following, was terrible, they also presented the Japanese government with a threat they couldn't counter. Faced with such a threat they could surrender with some measure of face. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sp1richy Posted March 22, 2017 Report Share Posted March 22, 2017 I must say ive enjoyed reading this thread and learnt quite a lot! I don't know alot about these types of things so forgive me. I wonder why US have not tried to stage a coup in NK to overthrow the powers that be. Would this be too risky or is there simply not enough resources to justify it? As said above please forgive me if im being dumb. I think im too young to understand all the reasoning behind all the animosity between the counties so maybe someone could educate me? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hamster Posted March 22, 2017 Report Share Posted March 22, 2017 I must say ive enjoyed reading this thread and learnt quite a lot! I don't know alot about these types of things so forgive me. I wonder why US have not tried to stage a coup in NK to overthrow the powers that be. Would this be too risky or is there simply not enough resources to justify it? As said above please forgive me if im being dumb. I think im too young to understand all the reasoning behind all the animosity between the counties so maybe someone could educate me? Foreign assisted coups and regime change are illegal under international law. That's why they always find "friendly rebels", WMD or other handy false flags when manufacturing consent and conflict. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sp1richy Posted March 22, 2017 Report Share Posted March 22, 2017 Foreign assisted coups and regime change are illegal under international law. That's why they always find "friendly rebels", WMD or other handy false flags when manufacturing consent and conflict. haha it is the yanks we are talking about! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clakk Posted March 22, 2017 Report Share Posted March 22, 2017 The very nature of the North Korean state precludes a coup as anyone out of place would be reported by a brainwashed and terrified populace conditioned from birth that ping pong and his dad ting tong are gods to be followed slavishly and without question .Also if Uncle Sam got a bit silly with China,s pet rottweiler then it would get pretty hot around the sea of Japan and the outcome would be a total mess as a certain incumbent of the White house is a tad unstable himself Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rewulf Posted March 22, 2017 Report Share Posted March 22, 2017 (edited) Although its said that only the elites and military have access to the internet in NK ,I would imagine there must be some knowledge of the outside world amongst the 'common people' But what would this tell them? That virtually the entire world sees them as a threat, and in turn their 'god leader' will protect them from the nasties. God leader and the rest of the elites must then come up with various schemes to keep the status quo. A big army of conscripts to keep them occupied, and various weapons programs, including nuclear, to create the illusion that they are a force to be reckoned with. The reality of it is, in the highly unlikely event of an invasion south, NK would have its military capabilities removed extremely quickly. It knows this, despite the bluster and threats, it doesnt even qualify as sabre rattling,as its only holding a pointy stick. I really dont believe China would get involved, they dont want war, at least not yet. Plus the economic damage to it would be catastrophic. Their bi lateral agreement is just another deterrent without substance. Edited March 22, 2017 by Rewulf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.