S.Korea's nuke issue

FlyingFrog

Active member
Should we do something actively abour S.Korea's nuke issue?

We should not ONLY deal with nukes in Iran or N.Korea, but S.Korea too.

--

China hopes to solve S.Korea's nuke issue within IAEA

VIENNA, Nov. 25 (Xinhuanet) -- China hopes that South Korea will continue to cooperate fully with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in providing speedily relevant information concerning its nuclear activities so as to bring about an early solution to the issue within the framework of the agency, a seniorChinese diplomat said on Thursday ...

Continue:
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2004-11/26/content_2263643.htm
 
It sounds like S. Korea is cooperating with the IAEA. Exactly who are the "we" you are referring to?
On Friday, IAEA's board of governors criticized South Korea for conducting plutonium and uranium experiments in 1982 and 2000, but refrained from tougher options, including possible referral to the Security Council.
http://asia.news.yahoo.com/041127/ap/d86k1r8o1.html
Of course N. Korea is upset over what it sees as double standards.
Do you think further steps need to be taken?
 
With "we" I mean international community.

Thanks for the good LINK.

Yes, I think we should treat the S.Korea nuke issue even serious as that of N.Korea, otherwise it is indeed double standards.

In the PAST it (SK) was cheating regards the nuke thing, we gotta make sure it can NEVER cheat more in the FUTURE, so tough measures are needed to watch them carefully :D
 
The experiments were probably technology experimenters... to see if we could build a nuke over night if we needed to. I highly doubt there were any plans to actual produce, store etc. but the need to be sure of being able to build a bomb is really no secret. We live in one of the world's bad neighborhoods where although fighting's not frequent, once it erupts, it erupts bad.
Then again the one in 2000 with Kim Dae-jung... that guy was some piece of work. Who knows what he was thinking. Wouldn't be surprised if he was doing the nuke experiments for the North Koreans. Well that's going a bit too far but you know what I mean.
 
I don't know what you mean.

Build a nuke overnight? Too optimistic.

1. U gotta alot of time to test it

2. U gotta alot of time to fit it into missiles or try it on aircrafts.
 
This is a topic all 18-25 year olds should follow very closely.

The way our Commander and Cheif has been talking (especially while in Chile), makes me think he is pondering taking action.

North Korea keeps lying, Saddam kept lying...
 
"Build a nuke overnight" is an expression. Basically means if you need one, you can make one right away.
Now this is the challenge that South Korea had, how do you do it without testing the weapon?
Actually the technology of having a nuke and detonating it isn't too complex... most reasonably accomplished physics teachers can tell you how ot do it. It's really about the materials because they are so well controlled. However, how do you know you got it right without testing, right?
Fitting into missiles and aircraft isn't a problem for South Korea. South Korea produces some of the best high tech products nowadays and even has experience building fighter jets so it shouldn't be a big deal. Though I don't see South Korea doing any missile delivery because I think the only significant kind of surface to surface missile South Korea has is the MLRS systems.

FlyingFrog said:
I don't know what you mean.

Build a nuke overnight? Too optimistic.

1. U gotta alot of time to test it

2. U gotta alot of time to fit it into missiles or try it on aircrafts.
 
but its just a tin can....one land rover touches that and it'll implode...give me a rover or a VW anyday
 
Actually the technology of having a nuke and detonating it isn't too complex... most reasonably accomplished physics teachers can tell you how ot do it.

Absolutely right. Basically it's only about getting your hands on Uranium and being able to enrich it (centrifuges). From there on it's as complex as cooking up a nice meal.

With the right people in their ranks ANY well funded organisation could produce nukes, not only the fission but the fusion kind as well.
 
South Korea is our ally, though.

No matter what country is an ally or not an ally, diminishing the amount of nuclear weapons in this world is very important in an attempt to dismantle as much weapons that fit within the WMD category.

In my opinion, the United States should really put a halt to South Korea's nuclear weapons program immediately. This will spark nuclear proliferation in Asia and will motivate North Korea to build nuclear weapons.
 
Kane said:
South Korea is our ally, though.

No matter what country is an ally or not an ally, diminishing the amount of nuclear weapons in this world is very important in an attempt to dismantle as much weapons that fit within the WMD category.

In my opinion, the United States should really put a halt to South Korea's nuclear weapons program immediately. This will spark nuclear proliferation in Asia and will motivate North Korea to build nuclear weapons.

Of course it matters. It's one thing to say that the world would be better without WMDs. But it is overly simplistic to say that it doesn't matter which countries are allied with which or that the United States should put a halt to S. Korea's anything. Additionally, I don't think N.Korea needs any other motivation than it's own paranoia about its national security.
Do you believe that N. Korea does not have nuclear weapons?
 
I find it odd that another thread had proclaimed that the ROK wanted North Korea to have their Nuke Program and supported North Koreas contiuance of a Nuke program.

Yet now the question is asked "Should something be done about the ROK'S nuke program?"

If the ROK supports North Koreas program as alledged before. Should not the North support the Souths?
 
Nah. the cars are meant to be built cheaply. You get what you pay for. But cameras etc. some amazing stuff is rolling off the assembly lines.
They targeted the consumers who needed an affordable car... and that market is big.
Korea never REALLY went out to make a Land Rover equivilent... makes sense when you consider that the "Jeep" style car doesn't sell in Korea.

beardo said:
the_13th_redneck said:
South Korea produces some of the best high tech products nowadays

except when it comes to cars...man those things are shite

The program has been halted.
One thing is clear. The need for South Korea to possess nuclear weapons is inversely related to America's commitment to the region in keeping the possible Chinese threat at bay.

Kane said:
South Korea is our ally, though.

No matter what country is an ally or not an ally, diminishing the amount of nuclear weapons in this world is very important in an attempt to dismantle as much weapons that fit within the WMD category.

In my opinion, the United States should really put a halt to South Korea's nuclear weapons program immediately. This will spark nuclear proliferation in Asia and will motivate North Korea to build nuclear weapons.

I answered this one before. RoK wants NKs to have a Nuke is only half the story of a half truth. There are those who are NUTS who believe that this Nuke is being developed to protect the entire Korean people. This is lunacy. The country is pretty split on the whole matter... I'm sure you can relate to that too as an American. Basically some people are so deep in anti-Americanism that they cease to percieve reality. They forget all about the past and as a result lose all reference to assess the present.
NK does not support SK like SK's population sees the NK (as a misunderstood brother). The attitude is rather hostile, though North Korea's main foe is the US.

03USMC said:
I find it odd that another thread had proclaimed that the ROK wanted North Korea to have their Nuke Program and supported North Koreas contiuance of a Nuke program.

Yet now the question is asked "Should something be done about the ROK'S nuke program?"

If the ROK supports North Koreas program as alledged before. Should not the North support the Souths?

All this nonsense can only go too far.
I'm so confused. The younger generation are better clothed, better fed, better educated... they can do all this brilliant stuff but their ability to see the world ... or even see their back yards is so ridiculously poor.
I'm usually a minority in my age bracket for my view, which is much more representative of people between the ages from 40 to the death bed. They knew what it was really like. I take their word for it, not some politician's.
 
Don't take it out of context 13th. I was attempting to point out the inconsistanceies in some of this argument.

Seems a common procedure for some to worry about the ROK having a nuke that could range them if the balloon went up and they stepped in. ;)
 
Back
Top