As speculation mounts that Kim Jong-un and Trump could meet this month, analysts say Pyongyang will continue to see nuclear weapons as a matter of survival
North Korea’s launch last week of a missile from a naval destroyer elicited an uncharacteristically prosaic analysis from the country’s leader, Kim Jong-un. The launch was proof, he said, that arming ships with nuclear weapons was “making satisfactory progress”.
But the test, and Kim’s mildly upbeat appraisal, were designed to reverberate well beyond the deck of the 5,000-tonne destroyer-class vessel the Choe Hyon – the biggest warship in the North Korean fleet.
His pointed reference to nuclear weapons was made as the US and Israel continued their air bombardment of Iran – a regime Donald Trump had warned, without offering evidence, was only weeks away from having a nuclear weapon.
That’s because nukes ARE the only path to security lmao. As soon as the first one was tested, and then fuck me used against civilians everyone watching jnmed understood this.
It sucks, and I would much prefer a world without nuclear weapons, but this is reality unfortunately. If you have nukes, you have leverage without ever having to use them
This is the plot of metal gear
used against civilians
Uhhhh…
I don’t quite know how to break it to you but:
-
There’s no other way to use a nuke, they cover too wide an area.
-
Killing civilians was the norm in WW2, every war before that, and the vast majority of every war since.
Like, if the nukes on Japan wouldn’t have been dropped, it would have had to be more firebombing and then a ground invasion.
Firebombings which still had a higher kill count in Japan than both nukes combined.
The entire point of a nuke, is that all it takes is a single one to wipe out entire square miles of a city. There’s no way to do that without civilian casualties, and it’s only a matter of time until one gets thru defenses.
However if you compare the nukes used in Japan to current nukes, they now cover a lot more than 1 city…
Yeah, and conventional attacks have also evolved past just dumping napalm from a balloon…
Or attaching small moltovs to bats and releasing them.
Like, nukes getting bigger is better as a dettertent.
That’s the entire point of a deterrent.
Where we fucked up, is who we entrusted the buttons to.
There’s no other way to use a nuke, they cover too wide an area.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tactical_nuclear_weapon
Like, if the nukes on Japan wouldn’t have been dropped, it would have had to be more firebombing and then a ground invasion.
The nuclear strikes on Japan represented a political decision taken by the United States, aimed squarely at the Soviet Union; it was the first strike in the Cold War.
In August 1945, the USSR was preparing to invade Japan to overthrow its ruling fascist regime, which had been allied with Nazi Germany – which the Soviet Red Army had also just defeated in the European theater of the war.
Washington was concerned that, if the Soviets defeated Japanese fascism and liberated Tokyo like they had in Berlin, then Japan’s post-fascist government could become an ally of the Soviet Union and could adopt a socialist government.
The atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, therefore, were not so much aimed at the Japanese fascists as they were aimed at the Soviet communists.
https://geopoliticaleconomy.com/2023/08/07/atomic-bombing-japan-not-necessary/
Modern tactical nuclear warheads have yields up to the tens of kilotons, or potentially hundreds, several times that of the weapons used in the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
They could be dialed down lower, but even a “small” tactical nuke is bigger than what got dropped on Japan.
It is not a “bunker buster” type of munition.
And I have no idea what you’re second rambling source is trying to say.
You don’t know me so you would have no way of knowing this about me, but yes I am very familiar with all the tradeoffs and decision making in this part of WW2 around ground assault vs nukes and continued bombing etc 🙌
I am very familiar with all the tradeoffs and decision making
Another Godzilla connoisseur, I see.
You clearly believe so…
But that’s not the impression one gets from the words you type.
✌️
-
Anyone who didn’t learn that lesson from Ukraine is a fucking idiot
They had nukes, and gave them away after assurances if Russia invaded they’d be defended.
Instead we left them out to dry and started another war instead
And unfortunately, North Korea is very correct in this assessment :(
shit, i’m in canada and we are having a new conversation about acquiring nukes. USA is making the world a very dangerous place, and it’s all because grossly rich turds like trump want more.
when you type USA, do you mean the divided states between Canada and Mexico?
Ununited states of amerikkka
“North Korea’s view”
Ha, yeah, it’s a NK thing. It’s everybody’s view.
I wonder how long it will take the EU to understand this
Ukraine found that out in 2022.
France knows, Poland knows and will probably be the first new nuclear power in the EU.
2014*
УНТИЛ ЩЕ АЛЛ СПЕАК РУССИАН
Oh damn, “fake” cyrillic that actually uses the letters right 😀
just North Korea? How about the rest of the free world becoming a little more cozy to owning a nuke? What is stopping the American barbarians from just coming over and taking what they want? especially with their empire crumbling? See what the zionazis did to gaza? That is potentially ALL OF US.
When you are facing a nation-state level power or above that 1.- has the ability to carpet bomb and genocide multiple countries 2.- supports others doing the same and 3.- shows disregard of international law, how can nukes be not the correct, reasonable defense?
I’ve never understood the international position that Iran, of all countries, should not have a nuclear program. Its enemy is literally the US!
Exactly, Trump’s brain has shrunk to the point of nonexistence.
Am I missing something here?
How nuclear weapons can be a safe path, or a matter of survival?
Do these so called “leaders” have in mind the catastrophic effects of launching nuclear missiles?
All they want to have nuclear weapons so they can bully their neighbours or enemies, until someone launches a nuclear attack and then everyone retaliates.
But they have any idea about the after effects? Isn’t Chernobyl a hard lesson for these people?
Seriously, the world is being run by selfish lunatics with too much power in their hands.
Countries with nuclear weapons aren’t subjected to as much US imperialism because of the threat of retaliation.
Ok, I get it.
And what about the consequences?
Have they thought about that?
