Posted on 09/11/2016 8:05:12 PM PDT by TigerLikesRooster
Calls growing in South Korea for nuclear armament
2016/09/11 15:27
SEOUL, Sept. 11 (Yonhap) -- A group of security and nuclear experts has recently launched a think tank to discuss ways to arm South Korea with nuclear weapons, while ruling party lawmakers on Sunday renewed calls for the redeployment of U.S. tactical nuclear weapons here and eventually South Korea's independent nuclear weapons development in response to North Korea's repeated nuclear tests.
"The South Korean nuclear research group, composed of about 10 North Korea, security and nuclear specialists, was launched in early September," Cheong Seong-chang, a North Korea researcher at the Sejong Institute who represents the think tank, told Yonhap News Agency. "The members plan to have in-depth discussions on how South Korea could develop its own nuclear weapons and find common ground and share their knowledge on the issue."
The group is the first known South Korean think tank on the nuclear armament issue whose launch comes amid North Korea's accelerating nuclear and missile threats.
On Friday, North Korea conducted its fifth nuclear test, only eight months after its fourth nuclear test in January.
The think tank's launch coincided with growing calls for South Korea's own nuclear weapons program in the face of growing nuclear threats from the North.
Won Yoo-chul, a representative at the ruling Saenuri Party, argued in a statement issued after the test that "Only nuclear weapons could be an effective deterrence against nuclear weapons," urging the government to push for nuclear armament.
Won's position has been supported by former Saenuri Chairman Kim Moo-sung and former Saenuri chief policymaker Kim Jung-hoon, among others.
But a South Korean government official denied any move for nuclear armament, reconfirming its stance of denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula.
South Korea's nuclear armament constitutes a direct violation of the Nonproliferation Treaty, which could lead to international sanctions and jeopardize the South Korea-U.S. Defense Treaty, government officials said.
It would also weaken the grounds for South Korea's calls to denuclearize North Korea, they said.
As a middle ground, redeployment of U.S. tactical nuclear weapons in South Korea could be one option, experts claimed.
All U.S. tactical nuclear weapons were removed from South Korea in a joint Seoul-Pyongyang declaration in 1992, which was signed to make the Korean Peninsula free of nuclear weapons.
"Deploying tactical nuclear weapons again in South Korea could have the effect of shortening the response time (after being attacked), as well as the symbolic meaning that any nuclear attack will be retaliated with a nuclear weapon," one military official said.
North Korea's nuclear capacities have raised calls among some South Korean conservatives for Seoul's own nuclear weapons development to deal with North Korea's nuclear programs.
"We plan to steadily increase our membership to about 20 people," Cheong of the Sejong Institute said, adding, "We are also considering publishing a book that outlines various opinions on the nuclear armament issue."
North Korea's fifth nuclear test has proved the clear limits of the international community's sanctions on North Korea in denuclearizing the country, he said.
"South Korea should not stick to the sanctions approach whose effect is very limited. Instead, the country should show off to North Korea that Seoul, the world's sixth largest nuclear energy power, can outpace Pyongyang in the nuclear weapons front," according to the expert.
Kim Tae-woo, a former head of the state-run Korea Institute for National Unification and a member of the new think tank, said the research group plans to provide the result of their discussion to the government.
“””They believe Japan did nothing wrong during their militarist regime before 1945. They justify all actions at the time, including Pearl Harbor Attack, Nanjing Massacre, brutal treatment of allied POW’s to name a few.”””
Kinda makes them my enemy then .......
They believe Japan did nothing wrong during their militarist regime before 1945.
Oh, my!
I seem to recall there was some kind of seizing of a government building, a couple decades ago, which ended when the leader of the group that had staged the takeover ordered one of his thralls to behead him. Literally chopped his head off, to end the standoff.
Same people or something different?
Likewise to you. You were the guys I had to turn in my outdated ammo to when I was promoted to the armory. Smooth bored a couple of M-16s on the end of the rack while trying to avoid you guys and the accompanying paperwork.
Yeah.... ADR’s ammo destruct requests for burning small arms up to 40mm HE/HEDP were routine duty. 40mm an up went on the demolition shot. Usually Ammo Apes dealt with the end users like you guys and called us only if it was damaged, then we got involved.
Hope yer well, at peace and happy..... you earned it !!
I think I confused a couple different incidents. According to wikipedia There was a building seized in 1977 and i’m pretty sure that is the bulk of what I was recollecting.
To attack Japan - or threaten to. China needs the "threat" of Japanese aggression to take their public's mind off the impossibility of maintaining 7% growth and the inevitable economic decline they are facing. US-operated THAAD systems in South Korea pose a threat - however slight - to their ability to threaten an attack on Japan as a diversion to help keep the Communist Party in power.
China has zero interest in a military confrontation with South Korea - indeed, they are now likely to support the South in any hot conflict with the North - but South Korea is also right in the way of any missile-rattling they might like to engage in against their ancient adversary.
Found it. Yukio Mishima in 1970.
Depending on where the (Northern) Polar Jet Stream is at, at the time of the fight, you may have to re-evaluate that. This especially if the situation “builds” such that more than a handful of nukes are involved, and / or China and Japan get involved.
Even now, if you eat a fish out of a body of water in the US not contaminated by a local source, most of the mercury in that fish is likely to have drifted here from China, via much less efficient transport.
All the above does not consider the Nork’s developing missile capacity, and the possibility (I’d call it a likelihood) that under duress, they might do something “nuts”. Yes, the Norks are mostly blackmailers, but, still...
I refer you to: http://www.nti.org/learn/countries/north-korea/delivery-systems/
In which I find the most important bit of information to be: “This prompt sequence of development is remarkable, and historically unprecedented for a small developing country.”
He was also gay.
I'm pretty sure most Japs believe that they never did anything wrong, not just the militarists.
Japs are quite skilled at pretending nothing is or was wrong. For example: Issei Sagawa.
Japan was an aggressor nation, which was reborn as a victim nation after the war.
You describe it perfectly. They didn't remember how their doctors did experiments on Korean and Chinese people. Neither did they remember that upon their return the Japanese public treated these doctors as heroes. Some of them became the founders of prominent medical companies.
So they’re as delusional regarding reality as our Leftists? That’s quite a trick!
Years ago, NK guards at the border filed a complaint about “US hand-held nuclear weapons,” at the DMZ.
An investigation turned up a stainless steel thermos bottle that had been spotted by the Norks.
Yes, I had mashed the 1970 and 1977 incidents together in my memory.
Let me ask you this. Why can some sovereign countries have nukes while other sovereign countries like Pakistan, and China can? What is the international law qualifier there? The key is to activate our nuclear war head production, our delivery systems and our star wars and completely waste who ever actually moves toward us but these are sovereign countries and if we can tell them what to do then China can tell us what to do. We can’t dictate anything to these countries.
You are not even listening. What defense protects us from fallout carried here by the winds, from a nuclear conflict far away? What defense protects us from a nuclear winter, which is assured in the long run, with your approach, letting everyone “arm up” with nukes. Eh?
If the US and it’s allies are not the biggest, baddest dude on the block, then the only hope is that if China (say) replaces us, IT will be the enforcer, and would do so responsibly. Good luck with that.
Now as far as your question goes, legally, responsible countries sign on to non-proliferation treaties, largely because they realize that in a serious conflict, if they have nukes, they’ll get turned to glass.
In a more general sense, the powerful countries tell the weak ones what to do, all the time. That’s how it works. And it’s why we cannot become #2.
The blast zone for even the largest nuke is approx 5 miles. The heat and radiation is 21 miles radius — With wind about 32 miles in the direction of the wind cutting the other direction to a radiation zone to 10 miles.
Where was all the down wind death and dying after Eniwetok ?
43 nuclear bombs in atmosphere exploded over 10 years https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enewetak_Atoll#List_of_nuclear_tests_at_Eniwetok
Absolutely , not one down wind driven death 6000 miles from even the largest Hyrdogen bombs. ZERO. All that is baloney.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.