Nuclear strikes and why I have a hard time being friends with some people.

 Pages 1 2 3 4 NEXT
 

So, I was checking my facebook this morning.
And my friend had a post up that read as follows.

"All this back and forth between N. Korea and the US over nuclear warfare is getting old....N. Korea would be signing their death wish if they launched an attack...they don't even have nuclear miniaturization technology yet...what makes them think they stand a chance against anyone?

Which makes me wonder...why dont we just turn the entire N.Korea nation into a desolate radioactive wasteland? Its not like they give us...or anyone for that matter...anything at all, theyre just wasting everyones time and patience."

That statement just doesn't seem reasonable to me.

Unfortunately, I see this attitude in many people in my school, too. Whenever conflict with another nation gets brought up, there are always a few people who say something like "Let's just nuke them and be done with it". I've tried to explain the political repercussions and effects on innocents (as well as I understand them, at least), but they just keep insisting that we "nuke them". It's kind of unnerving.

The amount of empathy some people don't have, shocks me sometimes. This fellow also claimed they were brainwashed and could only be saved by wiping out them out. He deleted the post once I mentioned that it lacked basic humanity. I also met a guy once, who said that the solution for homelessness is "A bullet for every one of them."

I hate the commenters on the BBC News website that respond to every problem with "Let them die, the world is overpopulated anyway!" For some reason that comment really gets to me more than the other rubbish people harp on about in those comments.

Although North Korea is an interesting subject: Their threats are fairly baseless at the moment to the US, but if they are left to develop long range missile guidance tech and nuclear warheads small enough to fit on a missile... then they really do have something to bring to the bargaining table.
When the crazy kid next door starts chewing through the garden fence to get to you, you have to confront him some time, is waiting until he's broken through and started to run rabidly at you the right thing to do?

How about this for a reason as to why the US haven't rolled the tanks up Kim Jong-Un's front lawn

If they do, big brother China steps in, and nobody wants that. Simple.

I'm actually kinda worried about this whole thing. At the moment, we're arrogant. Laughing at the crazy little dictator making his claims of nuclear annhilation.

Many have said it'd be crazy to launch a strike...and it would be. But that's what we're dealing with; Crazy. And if a nuke was thrown at the US, the threat may not survive long, but neither would a load of other people. We don't think much about how much a single nuke would change our world. Let alone the immediate human death toll.

As for a pre emptive strike...I dunno. We can't turn the entire country into a wasteland, but...considering what we may be facing, doing nothing may be worse. We'd have to know where to strike though, and fact is, we probably don't.

As I said in another thread, some people are simply suckers for power trips and tough talk. There's a reason for a certain stereotype.

Luckily, I'm generally not friends with people who support genocide.

I disagree that nuclear strikes are never justified, but they are certainly Serious Business. You do not use them until things have gone catastrophically wrong.

Having said that, you can kill civilians with conventional explosives same as you can with nuclear devices...IIRC, the Japanese killed more Chinese civilians with swords than died in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and there's no reason why the target would have to be somewhere where there are civilians.

But, let's keep the nuclear taboo, shall we? Especially since when people talk about them, they don't usually mean limited tactical nuclear strikes, they mean indiscriminate attacks meant to eradicate the entire population of nations.

That picture is eerily accurate. I can't even consider him a friend anymore. He basically said that they have no right to live in safety. And this coming from a dude with 4 kids.

I am curious though, if Korea did launch, I assume it would be more than one. Realistically, how many could the US gov't take out of the sky? It's something that has never been tested as far as I know.

x-Tomfoolery-x:
That picture is eerily accurate. I can't even consider him a friend anymore. He basically said that they have no right to live in safety. And this coming from a dude with 4 kids.

I am curious though, if Korea did launch, I assume it would be more than one. Realistically, how many could the US gov't take out of the sky? It's something that has never been tested as far as I know.

Even if we ignore the fact that the farthest North Korea could even reach at this moment is Alaska, their missiles are large, outdated, and slow. I'm fairly certain U.S. jets and other anti-missile systems wouldn't have trouble taking them down.

x-Tomfoolery-x:

I am curious though, if Korea did launch, I assume it would be more than one. Realistically, how many could the US gov't take out of the sky? It's something that has never been tested as far as I know.

First rule of anti-nuclear preparation: Always keep in mind that a nuke doesn't need to be delivered by air.

No, it's never been tested, naturally, but as far as getting a nuke from point A (North Korea) to point B (across the DMZ, or across the Pacific) goes, missile delivery would likely be the least likely method to succeed...

Qwurty2.0:
Even if we ignore the fact that the farthest North Korea could even reach at this moment is Alaska, their missiles are large, outdated, and slow. I'm fairly certain U.S. jets and other anti-missile systems wouldn't have trouble taking them down.

Not so sure. Firstly, it's not really accurate to say their missiles are slow. With ballistic missiles, speed is tied directly to range.

Secondly, you don't really intercept missiles with jets, you don't have enough advance warning. Now, the US does have ABM systems, though there are complaints about its effectiveness.

The main problem, though, is who gives the order to launch them? You've got very little time to decide that an attack is coming and start firing anti missile missiles.

Having said that, I'd assume that in NK's case, their airspace is being very carefully monitored all the time.

thaluikhain:
Snip

Ah, I see. My comment was more speculation as I have not read up on long-range missile defense. For some reason I thought jets were used as anti-ballistics. :(

I also don't believe ballistic missiles will be the delivery method anyway. When I read NK's threats online I assumed it would be done via planted nuclear bomb or something (if they were to target the U.S.).

I've had friends who have expressed similar feelings about other situations (conflicts in africa, the middle east, etc), and those that didn't take the comments back when confronted about it are no longer my friends. Anyone who feel that their mild inconvenience at having to so much as hear about some trouble in the world matters more than the lives of thousands or millions of people experiencing that trouble first hand isn't worth the air they breathe, and certainly isn't worth my time associating with.

If nukes did end up being used, I hope at least it would swing global opinion in favour of disarmament. I can't see them being used by either side though, apart from potentially as a a last-hope measure by Kim Jong Un.

Qwurty2.0:

Even if we ignore the fact that the farthest North Korea could even reach at this moment is Alaska, their missiles are large, outdated, and slow. I'm fairly certain U.S. jets and other anti-missile systems wouldn't have trouble taking them down.

Err these are ballistic missiles that are being talked about, they travel into low earth orbit and then come down. The minimum speed that these missiles travel at is 15,430 mph. To date, no system has actually managed to hit a ballistic missiles in flight. During the 1st gulf war the US air force used the somewhat misleading definition of the patriot missile crossing the path of the incoming scud as a hit, to be fair they did not want give away the fact the there was a manufacturing defect that was causing the Iraqi scuds to break up on reentry. This definition has lead to a wide spread misunderstanding about the defences against ballistic missiles.

There is also a real possibility that North Korea can hit far further into the US than Alaska. In the early 90s the North bought some of the old soviet Golf II class submarines as scrap. The Golf II class was designed to fire 3 modified scud missiles from underwater. Now there is enough space for those submarines to be retro fitted with longer ranger missiles. It is not impossible that the entire pacific cost of the US is range of sub launched missiles, however it is North Korea and they might have turned those subs into something totally crazy like an underwater casino.

Most people who talk like that aren't being completely serious. Just though I'd let you know.

China will remove Kim Jong Un in a sponsored Coup d'état long before it gets to a nuclear incident and I think he knows this or if he doesn't he isn't long in this world

Because some people are stupid, and stupid people have a hard time comprehending anything other than the simplest solution to a problem.

And what could be simpler than "Push button, everyone dies"?

x-Tomfoolery-x:
The amount of empathy some people don't have, shocks me sometimes. This fellow also claimed they were brainwashed and could only be saved by wiping out them out. He deleted the post once I mentioned that it lacked basic humanity. I also met a guy once, who said that the solution for homelessness is "A bullet for every one of them."

You can't disagree that he's technically right.

My response to that would've have been "Thanks for your input Hitler, we'll keep that in mind."

My worry is that if the Best Koreans do indeed start a war with the U.S., Britain will be dragged in because of our 'special relationship'. As far as I'm aware, the U.S. don't really need to fear the Koreans at this point in time, but they do need to worry about the Chinese. If the Koreans drag Papa China in to this then things are going to get very ugly very quickly.

The U.S. can handle the Koreans in a conventional war.
Nukes and China change the game.

Yep, more people are gonna get burned in the world we live in... uh... everything changes, but boy how they stay the same. I sometimes actually do think that the world would be better off after humans have effectively managed to kill each other off. Here's hoping Koreans and Americans don't disappoint. //end of cynical rant. don't hate on it, you'll just prove the point more :P.

I don't think China would do a lot if a war did break out, they're not the same China that was around during the Korean War. If anything happened they'd probably roll up tanks and take over the parts of Korea that they've invested in, rather than lose everything to South Korea.

And people have a easy time saying that the Nazis were evil...Godwins law or not withstanding.

x-Tomfoolery-x:
So, I was checking my facebook this morning.
And my friend had a post up that read as follows.

"All this back and forth between N. Korea and the US over nuclear warfare is getting old....N. Korea would be signing their death wish if they launched an attack...they don't even have nuclear miniaturization technology yet...what makes them think they stand a chance against anyone?

Which makes me wonder...why dont we just turn the entire N.Korea nation into a desolate radioactive wasteland? Its not like they give us...or anyone for that matter...anything at all, theyre just wasting everyones time and patience."

Pretty cold hearted thing to say. No nuclear strike is justified in my mind. Ever.
Because it's the common people that will suffer for it.

The people that say these things are morally abhorrent with an IQ lower than their shoe size.

They often don't understand or appreciate that North Koreans live in a secluded society where their day-to-day life is planned for them by the government. They don't have the internet, a minority have intranet which is of course full of propaganda. Their TV, propaganda again.

Unless a country wants the blood of millions of innocents on their hands, no one will nuke North Korea.

Pinkamena:

x-Tomfoolery-x:
The amount of empathy some people don't have, shocks me sometimes. This fellow also claimed they were brainwashed and could only be saved by wiping out them out. He deleted the post once I mentioned that it lacked basic humanity. I also met a guy once, who said that the solution for homelessness is "A bullet for every one of them."

You can't disagree that he's technically right.

Just as much as I'm technically right by telling him that the solution for me having to listen to his drivel is a bullet for him; or saying that shutting down the entirety of Escapist is the solution for all the "shoddy moderation" complaints.

I'm fairly convinced my empathy chip is pretty much broken for the most part, but nobody deserves to have a nuke dropped on them.

Tell your friend to watch the HBO documentary "White Light/Black Rain" and see if he still feels the way he does about it.

Captcha: ticked off

Oh captcha... you're hilarious when you're relevant to the conversation.

Yikes. To be honest, though, if NK did send nukes flying, I doubt that China would keep supporting them for long.

I used to say things like that a few years ago, grew out of it though. I do think something should be done about North Korea though, but nuking them isn't the first option on my list.

While i always try to be concious of the good people who live in other countries, N. Korea is an extremely strange place to me (someone on the outside).
I hear stuff like their rulers are worshipped as gods, the news is government run and full of lies, they maintain a huge army to deter and not for war, then constantly claim they will destroy the south, pop off a failed missle, claim they didn't, admit they did, show images of America burning on the news, Dennis Rodman, their current leader's wife is a beauty and would obviously be interested in a short, chubby dictator with multiple presumed human rights violations to his name... it kinda goes on.

As someone on the outside it seems horrid, but maybe someone from there could respond and share what it's really like, if they have permission to use the internet, if they have the freedom to access this website, if they have electricity.

Tank207:
I'm fairly convinced my empathy chip is pretty much broken for the most part, but nobody deserves to have a nuke dropped on them.

Tell your friend to watch the HBO documentary "White Light/Black Rain" and see if he still feels the way he does about it.

Captcha: ticked off

Oh captcha... you're hilarious when you're relevant to the conversation.

Thanks, I'll do that and get a copy for myself as well.
I enjoy history being examined by several sides.

Dee Oh Double Gizzle:
snip!

Thank you for that. The folks living over there certainly do not enjoy the same freedom as Americans or the easy access to information. But they do have friends and family like any other human being.

I personally hope that China kills off him and his dreadful staff of generals and put someone more sane, who doesn't have attitude problem, in position.

I'm saying China, because US would just trigger bad blood from the rest of the world, they also have a tendency to fuck up areas they invade.

A nuke is obviously a shit idea, general population of North Korea hasn't done much wrong, those in charge are idiots.

Vegosiux:

Pinkamena:

x-Tomfoolery-x:
The amount of empathy some people don't have, shocks me sometimes. This fellow also claimed they were brainwashed and could only be saved by wiping out them out. He deleted the post once I mentioned that it lacked basic humanity. I also met a guy once, who said that the solution for homelessness is "A bullet for every one of them."

You can't disagree that he's technically right.

Just as much as I'm technically right by telling him that the solution for me having to listen to his drivel is a bullet for him; or saying that shutting down the entirety of Escapist is the solution for all the "shoddy moderation" complaints.

I think getting rid of the moderators themselves would be a better analogy.

KaZuYa:
China will remove Kim Jong Un in a sponsored Coup d'état long before it gets to a nuclear incident and I think he knows this or if he doesn't he isn't long in this world

Yea, we have too much of Cina's money for them to let anything happen to us.

But I do get OPs point. I have a couple of friends who say things like that and I hate it when they do because it means I have to get into an argument about it. It's just a really harsh thing to wish on a people, especially a group of people who live under constant threat of their own leader(s) like N Koreans or Iranians.
I know there's been a lot of arguments about drones and stuff but I'd rather the president send in drones and black pajama guys than rolling tanks through or nuking the place. It's safer, cheaper, and more humane.

 Pages 1 2 3 4 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked