Here
and
Now

opinions

N Korean defiance challenges moral authority of nuclear club

6 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2016 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

©2024 GPlusMedia Inc.

6 Comments
Login to comment

I actually agree with the North on this one. No one has the right to tell them what to do. Only their own people should have that right.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

I actually agree with the North on this one. No one has the right to tell them what to do

Sad, illogical and simplistic comment.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

The article brings up good points. What right does the rest of the world have to tell the North Korean dictatorship what it can and cannot do? On the other hand, the more nuclear powers that exist in the world, the more likely that a nuclear weapon will again be used. One might make the argument that it is almost inevitable that nuclear weapons will be used again, either intentionally or accidentally.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

I'm sorry, I'm afraid I can't agree. It's all well and good to say that a nation has the sovereign right to develop whatever technology it wants. But the moment that nation has to beg for food and fuel from the rest of the world, it loses that "right". If you can't meet the needs of your people, you aren't a sovereign.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Nuclear club has moral authority? Clear oxymoron

0 ( +1 / -1 )

How much right do nations have to tell other nations what to do? Moreover, how much of a right do nuclear powers, which have no intention of giving up their own arsenals, have to demand others to give up theirs?

North Korea, of course, says none.

Unfortunately, N. Korea is right. However, in terms of defense, N. Korea doesn't need a nuclear deterrent.

The two fulcrums of the Cold War, the U.S. and the Soviet Union, were, are thousands of miles away from one another. Therefore, conventional weapons provided no offensive threat nor did either want to confront the other directly, most likely in Central Europe. So, if one had them, the other didn't feel safe without them as well or chance suffering devastating death and destruction.

However, N. Korea's targets are within conventional artillery and rocket/missile range, so it's arguable that they don't need nuclear weapons to be secure against attack. Again, if the U.S. or S. Korea were to attack N. Korea, while they would easily be defeated, the cost of this would be too great to justify the move. The U.S. and/or S. Korea could easily destroy N. Korea's military on the ground, but not without the South (and Japan likely) suffering tremendous casualties and physical destruction.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites