You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
China-Japan-Koreas
Some suggest S. Korea should go nuclear
2013-03-12
[USATODAY] Increasing tensions on the Korean Peninsula over North Korea's nuclear ambitions and provocations are pushing more South Koreans to raise the once unthinkable: developing their own nuclear deterrent, analysts said Monday.

South Korean politician Chung Mong Joon of the governing Saenuri, or New Frontier Party, indicated that the South may have to look into a nuclear deterrent given that North Korea is acting like "a gangster."

The South Korean newspaper Joong Ang Ilbo suggested in an editorial that the U.S. "nuclear umbrella" may not be enough. Although the South is a signatory to the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons treaty, which means the country cannot legally develop nuclear weapons, the newspaper says the North's threats mean new defenses must be considered.

"Nuclear weapons can be stopped only with nuclear weapons, as in the mutual assured destruction that prevented a nuclear conflict during the Cold War," it said.

Bruce Klingner, former deputy chief for Korea in the CIA's Directorate of Intelligence under President Bill Clinton, says a nuclear South is a "non-starter."

A nuclear-armed South Korea could cause Japan, a U.S. ally that has tense relations with South Korea, to go nuclear, too, creating unnecessary instability in the northeast Asia region, Klingner said. Besides, he said, South Korea since the end of the Korean War in 1953 has had the same assurances that the United States would defend it that Western Europe has had since the end of World War II.
So lemme get this straight: NKor, which is led by a family of lunatics, gets nuke weapons. But SKor, which is usually rational, shouldn't get them because that would make Japan, also usually rational, get them, too. Instead they should both rely on the U.S. "nuclear umbrella," which is under the control of B.O., who could give a projectile crap whether SKor and/or Japan get nuked as long as his party picks up seats in the next election. Y'gotta hand it to "Some." The guy's a genius. Of sorts.
Posted by:Fred

#5  ION TOPIX > [Korea Herald] NORTH KOREA FIELDING MOBILE ICBM: US INTELLIGENCE CHIEF [USDNI Director James Clapper].

* WORLD NEWS > [Guardian.UK] NORTH KOREA PUTS TROOPS ON "MAXIMUM ALERT" FOR POSSIBLE WAR WITH SOUTH.

Anytime, anywhere, perhaps right now???

* Also from GUARDIAN.UK > US DEEMS NORTH KOREA NUCLEAR STRIKE UNLIKELY WIDOUT THREAT TO DYNASTY.

* KYOTO NEWS > NORTH KOREA READY FOR [sudden = surprise] MILITARY ATTACKS WIDOUT WARNING: US OFFICIAL, even iff warnings were made long past.

* GLOBAL TIMES > MILITARY CONFLICT ON KOREAN PENINSULA "INEVITABLE", SAYS CHINESE MEDIA [various sources].

ARTIC > ROK = SOUTH KOREA is too reliant or over-dependent on its security alliance wid the US; SITUATION IS NOW SUCH THAT THERE IS ROOM FOR INTERVENTION ON THE PENINSULA BY ANY FOREIGN POWER.

versus

* WORLD MILITARY FORUM > NORTH KOREA: NUCLEAR DETERRENCE IS VITAL TO CRUSHING US-LED ANTI-REUNIFICATION IMPERIALIST DESIGNS + INDUCING OR FOSTERING SAIDSAME FINAL INTER-KOREAN REUNIFICATION VIA THE "UNIVERSAL SWORD".

* SAME > US CIA ANALYST: NORTH KOREA POSSESSES THIRD-GENERATION EMP NUCLEAR WARHEADS/BOMBS CAPABLE OF DESTROYING THE US TECHNOLOGICAL GRID IN A SINGLE BLAST. CONVENTIONAL-ONLY NEW KOREAN WAR COULD RESULT IN UP TO ONE-MILYUHN CASUALTIES.

* SAME > NORTH KOREA SPOKESMAN: DPRK SOLDIERS AND PEOPLE READY TO BECOME "HUMAN BOMBS/BULETS" TO DEFEAT US-ALLIED FORCES ON THE PENINSULA, + DEFEND KIM-JONG-UN + REGIME.

* SAME > US NAVY: MOBILIZATION, DEPLOYMENT OF LAND-BASED BALLISTIC MISSLES + AIRPOWER BY MAINLAND CHINA DIRECTLY ACROSS FROM TAIWAN EFFECTIVELY CHANGES THE "BALANCE OF COMBAT POWER" IN THE TAIWAN STRAITS TO THE ADVANTAGE OF CHINA + PLA. US NUCLEAR CARRIERS TO SUFFER MORE DIFFICULTIES IN DEFEATING THE THREAT FROM CHINESE LAND-BASED MISSLES IN THE DEFENSE OF TAIWAN.
Posted by: JosephMendiola   2013-03-12 23:11  

#4  Oh, thank goodness. My first thought was Killed In Action, and I was very, very confused.
Posted by: trailing wife   2013-03-12 21:27  

#3  Thanks for buying KIA's Dopey Sinatra9196. You're helping good Georgian workers and taxpayers just down the road.
Posted by: Besoeker   2013-03-12 17:52  

#2  Sigh. This whole deal is bad for business. WWTMD? (What Wouuld The Mafia Do?)

On a personal note. We gottem two KIAs in the household. The Korean peninsula nuking itself would play havoc with our 10-year warranties.
Posted by: Dopey Sinatra9196   2013-03-12 16:23  

#1  "Mahanist" Rising China is unlikely to accept either the DPRK or ROK going Nukulaar, let alone main rival Japan, espec iff it China does not have de facto sovereign or military control over
"post-US","Manifest Destiny"-important TAIWAN.

OTOH pragmatically procurement of NucWeaps may SSSSSSSSSHHHHHH ... CCCCCCC be the only way the two Koreas can effectively finally integrate + reunify despite China's eye.

Again, IMO China still desires to have tech-saavy Japan under its Nuke or Geopol Umbrella than under the US, + also desires to keep SCO-CSTO BFF Russia out of any NE Asia mil conflict agz the US-Allies + UNCOM.

To keep Mama Russia happy nothing can go boom or glow-in-the-dark over in Japan.

'TIS GOOD FOR NIPPON AS IT MAY MEAN CHINA WON'T ENGAGE IN ALL-OUT CONVENTIONAL OR LIMITED-VS-FULL NUCLEAR CONFLICT AGZ JAPAN PROPER, + KEEP ANY COMBAT OER THE SENKAKUS [Okinawa?] limited to "MIG ALLEY II" or "FALKLANDS" STYLE WAR SCENARIOS [Nippon = secondary, not primary combat front for PLA]. Japan + SDF may still see attacks agz key or select milbases by the PLA.

'TIS B-A-D, HOWEVER FOR US + TAIWAN + ASEAN, AS IT MEANS THE PLA MAY ENGAGE IN DIRECT OR INTENSIVE DEDICATED MILACTIONS FROM TAIWAN ALL THE WAY TO THE PHILIPPINES + SOUTH CHINA SEA, TO INCLUD INDIA-PAKISTAN ON THE MAINLAND.

Again, from the mostly empty Northern PHIL the PLA can cover any approach by intervening US CVBGS + EBGS.
Posted by: JosephMendiola   2013-03-12 01:55  

00:00