Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Pages: 1 ... 9 10 11 12 
Send Topic Print
nuclear disarmament and reciprocity (Read 12847 times)
Aussie
Gold Member
*****
Offline


OzPolitic

Posts: 37678
Gender: male
Re: nuclear disarmament and reciprocity
Reply #150 - May 20th, 2018 at 12:22pm
 
freediver wrote on May 20th, 2018 at 10:51am:
So basically, you say you support non-proliferation, at the same time as complaining that non-proliferation means something different to what you actually support?


Where is the requested 'screen dump,' Effendi?
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
polite_gandalf
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 20023
Canberra
Gender: male
Re: nuclear disarmament and reciprocity
Reply #151 - May 21st, 2018 at 1:19pm
 
freediver wrote on May 16th, 2018 at 4:22pm:
They will be negotiating how to avoid US invading, which would not have been necessary if they had not developed the nukes.


Your logic makes zero sense FD. The US actually invaded, and tried to wipe NK off the map. Subsequent to that they continued to be a real existential threat to the NK regime *LONG* before any NK nuclear program existed. I believe I pointed this out to you before, but which you continue to ignore

Quote:
There was no imminent threat of US invasion without that. That is just your delusional fantasy.


There was an *ACTUAL* invasion without that. To continue to ignore this as a relevant factor is the ultimate in delusional fantasies.
Back to top
 

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:
Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Online


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47058
At my desk.
Re: nuclear disarmament and reciprocity
Reply #152 - May 21st, 2018 at 9:28pm
 
What was there to negotiate Gandalf? NK used the nukes to bring the USA to the negotiating table for what? Whether to invade NK to stop them developing nukes?

Quote:
Subsequent to that they continued to be a real existential threat to the NK regime *LONG* before any NK nuclear program existed.


Has the nuclear program increased or decreased that threat?
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
polite_gandalf
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 20023
Canberra
Gender: male
Re: nuclear disarmament and reciprocity
Reply #153 - May 22nd, 2018 at 12:36pm
 
freediver wrote on May 21st, 2018 at 9:28pm:
What was there to negotiate Gandalf? NK used the nukes to bring the USA to the negotiating table for what? Whether to invade NK to stop them developing nukes?


To get the US to remove their threats and posturing - which as we just established existed long before any NK nuclear program - starting with the actual invasion and attempt to wipe NK off the map.

Also, to remove at least some of the sanctions.

freediver wrote on May 21st, 2018 at 9:28pm:
Has the nuclear program increased or decreased that threat?


What do you think FD - after NK acquired the ability to nuke US territory, has that made a possible attack on NK more or less likely? If you consider the US's track record in the post-war era, would you say they've tended to launch military strikes against countries that could retaliate against them in a way that would actually hurt them (eg with nukes), or have they tended to attack countries that had no capability to retaliate against them - say like Iraq, Libya, Panama etc?
Back to top
 

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:
Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Online


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47058
At my desk.
Re: nuclear disarmament and reciprocity
Reply #154 - May 22nd, 2018 at 6:56pm
 
I asked you Gandalf.

Has the nuclear program increased or decreased that threat?
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
polite_gandalf
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 20023
Canberra
Gender: male
Re: nuclear disarmament and reciprocity
Reply #155 - May 23rd, 2018 at 4:11pm
 
the answer should be obvious from my rhetorical question.

But in case its not - it has decreased it. Obviously.

NK nukes may yet achieve what nothing else has - remove a 60+ year existential threat they have been facing
Back to top
 

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:
Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Online


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47058
At my desk.
Re: nuclear disarmament and reciprocity
Reply #156 - May 23rd, 2018 at 9:30pm
 
Do you honestly think that threatening the US with nuclear weapons will make Un safer from US attack?
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Bobby.
Gold Member
*****
Online


Australian Politics

Posts: 94152
Melbourne
Gender: male
Re: nuclear disarmament and reciprocity
Reply #157 - May 23rd, 2018 at 9:59pm
 
Bobby. wrote on Apr 10th, 2018 at 10:51pm:
Bobby. wrote on Apr 10th, 2018 at 6:53pm:
polite_gandalf wrote on Apr 10th, 2018 at 1:52pm:
Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Apr 10th, 2018 at 9:11am:
Bobby. wrote on Apr 9th, 2018 at 9:25pm:
Gandalf - the whole nuclear situation in the world is insane -

these weapons should have been banned 70 years ago.




The problem is you can't ban them, completely. Now that they have been unleashed someone will always try to have them.


Thats the wrong attitude. We should absolutely try to abolish a weapon so horrific that it literally threatens our very existence as a species.

It is certainly not good enough to have this double standard that says North Korean nuclear weapons are unacceptable, but US (and Russian and Chinese etc) nuclear weapons are ok. Thats not to say we should agree with North Korea having the bomb, but we should at least acknowledge that it is perfectly reasonable and rational for North Korea to pursue nuclear weapons in the current geo-political reality - namely the US arsenal remains untouchable.



The major powers are in many ways criminal because they
could have organised to get rid of them -
in a verifiable way -
if they had really wanted to.

There is nothing we can ever do about it.



I see that my reply was ignored.
I wonder why?



Why does Gandalf always ignore me?
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
polite_gandalf
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 20023
Canberra
Gender: male
Re: nuclear disarmament and reciprocity
Reply #158 - May 24th, 2018 at 11:12am
 
freediver wrote on May 23rd, 2018 at 9:30pm:
Do you honestly think that threatening the US with nuclear weapons will make Un safer from US attack?


Obviously.

When was the last time the US attacked a nuclear armed nation?
When was the last time the US attacked a weak and defenseless nation that had no deterrence capability?

(ps, those are rhetorical questions again)
Back to top
 

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:
Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.
 
IP Logged
 
polite_gandalf
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 20023
Canberra
Gender: male
Re: nuclear disarmament and reciprocity
Reply #159 - May 24th, 2018 at 11:17am
 
Bobby. wrote on May 23rd, 2018 at 9:59pm:
Bobby. wrote on Apr 10th, 2018 at 10:51pm:
Bobby. wrote on Apr 10th, 2018 at 6:53pm:
polite_gandalf wrote on Apr 10th, 2018 at 1:52pm:
Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Apr 10th, 2018 at 9:11am:
Bobby. wrote on Apr 9th, 2018 at 9:25pm:
Gandalf - the whole nuclear situation in the world is insane -

these weapons should have been banned 70 years ago.




The problem is you can't ban them, completely. Now that they have been unleashed someone will always try to have them.


Thats the wrong attitude. We should absolutely try to abolish a weapon so horrific that it literally threatens our very existence as a species.

It is certainly not good enough to have this double standard that says North Korean nuclear weapons are unacceptable, but US (and Russian and Chinese etc) nuclear weapons are ok. Thats not to say we should agree with North Korea having the bomb, but we should at least acknowledge that it is perfectly reasonable and rational for North Korea to pursue nuclear weapons in the current geo-political reality - namely the US arsenal remains untouchable.



The major powers are in many ways criminal because they
could have organised to get rid of them -
in a verifiable way -
if they had really wanted to.

There is nothing we can ever do about it.



I see that my reply was ignored.
I wonder why?



Why does Gandalf always ignore me?


Who says I ignored it Bobby?

I didn't know you expected a reply. For the record, I agree the major powers are hypocritical and don't really have any interest in making the world nuke-free. I disagree with the last sentence. There is plenty we can do. Point out their hypocricy, for one.
Back to top
 

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:
Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.
 
IP Logged
 
Bobby.
Gold Member
*****
Online


Australian Politics

Posts: 94152
Melbourne
Gender: male
Re: nuclear disarmament and reciprocity
Reply #160 - May 24th, 2018 at 4:41pm
 
polite_gandalf wrote on May 24th, 2018 at 11:17am:
Who says I ignored it Bobby?

I didn't know you expected a reply. For the record, I agree the major powers are hypocritical and don't really have any interest in making the world nuke-free. I disagree with the last sentence. There is plenty we can do. Point out their hypocricy, for one.




dear Gandalf,
Finally you have replied.
Thank you.

The major powers are in many ways holding the rest of the world to ransom
with their nuclear weapons.
It is illegal to point a gun - even if it's unloaded at anyone yet
the world powers think it's OK to point nuclear missiles
at whole cities & threaten to kill billions of people.
We live with a loaded gun pointed at us every second of the day.
It's something you have to forget about otherwise
you'd go mad.

I disagree with you on the last point.
I don't think anything that anyone will ever say will
stop the current situation.
A destructive genie was let out of a bottle in 1945
& it can never be put back.





Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
freediver
Gold Member
*****
Online


www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 47058
At my desk.
Re: nuclear disarmament and reciprocity
Reply #161 - May 24th, 2018 at 9:16pm
 
polite_gandalf wrote on May 24th, 2018 at 11:12am:
freediver wrote on May 23rd, 2018 at 9:30pm:
Do you honestly think that threatening the US with nuclear weapons will make Un safer from US attack?


Obviously.

When was the last time the US attacked a nuclear armed nation?
When was the last time the US attacked a weak and defenseless nation that had no deterrence capability?

(ps, those are rhetorical questions again)


Do you think the US interest in non-proliferation might mean that Un's development of nukes might cause, rather than prevent, an attack by the US?
Back to top
 

I identify as Mail because all I do is SendIT!
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Bobby.
Gold Member
*****
Online


Australian Politics

Posts: 94152
Melbourne
Gender: male
Re: nuclear disarmament and reciprocity
Reply #162 - May 25th, 2018 at 6:11am
 
freediver wrote on May 24th, 2018 at 9:16pm:
polite_gandalf wrote on May 24th, 2018 at 11:12am:
freediver wrote on May 23rd, 2018 at 9:30pm:
Do you honestly think that threatening the US with nuclear weapons will make Un safer from US attack?


Obviously.

When was the last time the US attacked a nuclear armed nation?
When was the last time the US attacked a weak and defenseless nation that had no deterrence capability?

(ps, those are rhetorical questions again)


Do you think the US interest in non-proliferation might mean that Un's development of nukes might cause, rather than prevent, an attack by the US?



Gandalf won't answer but I will -

yes - if the USA feels threatened they will use their nukes
in a preemptive strike.

The last enemy you would want & the worst enemy would be the Yanks.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
polite_gandalf
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 20023
Canberra
Gender: male
Re: nuclear disarmament and reciprocity
Reply #163 - May 25th, 2018 at 11:11am
 
freediver wrote on May 24th, 2018 at 9:16pm:
polite_gandalf wrote on May 24th, 2018 at 11:12am:
freediver wrote on May 23rd, 2018 at 9:30pm:
Do you honestly think that threatening the US with nuclear weapons will make Un safer from US attack?


Obviously.

When was the last time the US attacked a nuclear armed nation?
When was the last time the US attacked a weak and defenseless nation that had no deterrence capability?

(ps, those are rhetorical questions again)


Do you think the US interest in non-proliferation might mean that Un's development of nukes might cause, rather than prevent, an attack by the US?


No. Obviously the US won't attack while ever there is a risk their territory will be nuked with retaliatory strikes. Thats the whole point.

The US: "Stop developing nukes, otherwise we won't be able to attack you!"
Back to top
 

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:
Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.
 
IP Logged
 
polite_gandalf
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 20023
Canberra
Gender: male
Re: nuclear disarmament and reciprocity
Reply #164 - May 25th, 2018 at 11:14am
 
Bobby. wrote on May 24th, 2018 at 4:41pm:
the world powers think it's OK to point nuclear missiles
at whole cities & threaten to kill billions of people.
We live with a loaded gun pointed at us every second of the day.
It's something you have to forget about otherwise
you'd go mad.


Its even more absurd than that. They think its ok to point their nukes at countries and lecture them about how wrong it is to have nukes. While simultaneously telling the world how keen on nuclear disarmament they are.

Can you think of anything more absurd? I'm struggling.
Back to top
 

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:
Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 ... 9 10 11 12 
Send Topic Print