News Is North Korea's Nuclear Capability a Global Threat?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Mental Gridlock
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Nuclear
Click For Summary
North Korea's nuclear capability raises concerns about global security, with discussions highlighting the unpredictability of its leadership and the potential for conflict. While some believe that North Korea would not use nuclear weapons due to the catastrophic consequences, others argue that the regime's continued development of these weapons poses a significant threat. The conversation also touches on the hypocrisy of nuclear policies, where established nuclear powers maintain their arsenals while denying others the same capability. The situation is complicated by North Korea's need to assert itself on the world stage despite its economic weaknesses. Overall, the debate reflects deep-seated fears about nuclear proliferation and the stability of international relations.
  • #31
I fear Iran a little more than North Korea.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
Theons said:
What could they possible want with nukes besides to have people fear them and to use them to threatin to help them become a superpower? There is none. Now i think if they had tried getting them years ago it wouldn't be such a big deal with some of the other countrys who got them. The countrys that had nukes back then actually had reasons for them, self defense and counter-attacks. Just imagin if every country had nukes, espically a lot of these middle east ones who are constantly having civil wars, with some of the crazy leadership over there what's stoping them from shooting a missile that will demolish there enemy?
Saddam Hussein was convinced that it was Iraq's chemical weapons and threat of missiles landing in Tehran that convinced Iran not to invade Iraq at the end of the Iraq-Iran war. In fact, he was convinced it was the threat of chemical weapons that kept the US from invading Iraq at the end of the first gulf war.

Which is what helped to create the mess we're currently in. Hussein couldn't get caught with evidence of chemical weapons since he hoped to have the sanctions from the first war stopped. Then again, he couldn't let the world know for sure that he'd disposed of his weapons. Considering Iraq's position, would he really want to be banking on the UN or the US to come to his aid if Iran decided a militarily weakened Iraq with no chemical weapons made a tempting target? All things considered, we would have had to step in, but I'm not sure how confident Hussein would have been about that.

Of course, Hussein might have thought having chemical weapons would prevent the world from reacting to his invasion of Kuwait. The idea of countries making miscalculations is what really worries the world about the spread of weapons of mass destruction - especially if the world has little faith in a country's decision makers.
 
  • #33
Mental Gridlock said:
I am wondering if North Korea is able to continue their nuclear weapons program, then is another country going to then wind up being nuked?

Well, it depends. If North Korea has a nuclear device, let's say it's only deliverable by horse-drawn carriage...would you consider that a threat?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
5K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
7K
  • · Replies 153 ·
6
Replies
153
Views
14K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
7K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K