Hiroshima

by on October 9, 2006 at 12:35 am in Current Affairs, History | Permalink

Hiroshima

In case you had forgotten.  The Japanese haven’t.  Here is the pointer.  Here is Thomas Schelling on nuclear weapons.  Kim Jong’s favorite movies?  "Friday the 13th and Hong Kong action films.  He is a big fan of Rambo and James Bond."

Barkley Rosser October 9, 2006 at 2:26 am

The immediate reactions of the media to the North
Korean test are curious. Fox is going on about how
now the allies in Asia will see how right the US is
about sanctions on North Korea. CNN is full of
commentators noting that a deal was ready to be cut
with North Korea a year ago, but hardliners in the
Bush administration blocked it, leading to this test.

Schelling in his talk emphasizes above all the
necessity of talking with one’s enemy. The Bush people
have been urged by the other six to do so privately
with the North Koreans. They have not, and now we
have this result, even if it is being written off in
some quarters as “a fizz not a pop.”

Valuethinker October 9, 2006 at 3:38 am

I also note a silence on ‘nuke North Korea’.

The conclusion I would draw if I was Brasil/North Korea/Iran/Syria/AN other country
likely to come into conflict with the US in the future, is get nuclear weapons *first*.

albatross October 9, 2006 at 9:31 am

Say, what happened to Israel, India, and Pakistan, long term, for becoming nuclear powers more-or-less openly? What do we expect to happen to North Korea? And what incentives does, say, Iran have in this world? Hell, what incentives do, say, Japan, Taiwan, South Korea, Malaysia, Singapore, Australia, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Venezuela, Brazil, Argentina, Chile, Mexico, Germany, Switzerland, Denmark, and Finland have? Presumably any of those countries could have nukes if they decided to spend the effort. Many of them may find that they are facing multiple nuclear powers around them.

This isn’t about some goofy “clash of civilizations” rhetoric, it’s about moving toward a world with 20-30 acknowledged nuclear powers, each with nuclear deterrents pointed at one or more neighbors, each with opportunities to lose track of some nukes or some plutonium. Every addition to the nuclear club pushes us toward that world, both directly and by reminding more countries that they may not want to rely for their nation’s survival on the willingness of the existing nuclear powers to protect them.

Peter October 9, 2006 at 10:30 am

The conclusion I would draw if I was Brasil/North Korea/Iran/Syria/ANY other country likely to come into conflict with the US in the future, is get nuclear weapons *first*.

Why did you include Brazil on that list?

J.C. Zannis October 9, 2006 at 12:36 pm

I think what is most frightening about North Korea potentially having nuclear weapons is not that they may be pointed at the U.S., Japan or South Korea. What frightens me is North Korea’s historical willingness to sell weapons to anyone willing to pay.

DK October 9, 2006 at 7:07 pm

Actually, Brazil did have a major nuclear weapons research program in the past, which they voluntarily abandoned. Likewise Argentina. I don’t think they have ANY chance of coming into military conflict with the US; they are too smart for that, and the US is busy recruiting them as a junior partner; we’d like Brazilian troops to run Haiti for us.

But there are nationalist elements in the Brazilian military who disagreed with the decision to end the nuclear research program, and I would agree with putting them on the list — in a world with 20-30 nuclear powers countries like Brazil, Argentina, Chile, Venezuela, Germany, Switzerland, and Sweden will definitely sign up.

Sweden, BTW, also had a significant nuclear program. Many peace-loving neutrals have seen nuclear weapons as a good alternative to making a superpower alliance.

handbags July 16, 2009 at 12:53 pm

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: