When a U.S. ballistic missile submarine (SSBN) surfaced for a rare visit to South Korea this week it was a blunt reminder that Washington always has nuclear-tipped missiles deployed within close striking distance of North Korea, analysts said.
I think the first line may have been in jest, regardless, the rest of the points are valid I believe. They are exclaiming in horror at the attitide conveyed by the article, that showing off with these subs and terrorizing NK with them is good and we should be proud of it. I also see this as pretty barbaric behaviour. That sub has enough nukes on it to probably turn to glass every population centre in NK. Isn’t that terrifying?
NK poses no real harm, they are desperately trying to catch up with their military, probably because they are surrounded by American weapons. The only thing that NK has been taught by the international community is that you have to have nukes and be a bully to be successful. Following the example of the US.
I’m not sure whether or not that poster is from Russia has much to do with what they wrote, and for the record, I found it perfectly legible.
„NK poses no real harm“ the people suffering under a brutal militaristic dictatorship. Starving and possibly worked to their death if they disagree even slightly with the state or dare to question their leader might disagree.
I did neglect to mention I meant external harm. But I wonder does surrounding them with guns and nukes make their state more likely to demilitarize? I feel like it does not.
Fair enough, I mean they are also increasingly posing a threat to external entities, didn’t a recent missile test fly over Japan? But in general I do not think NK is a positive influence on the world, much less once they can build and deploy nuclear weapons. In any case the original article really isn’t news as the us has the ability to strike basically anywhere on the planet with nuclear weapons. But I do agree that it won’t have a demilitarizing effect, however I doubt anything could have.
I think the first line may have been in jest, regardless, the rest of the points are valid I believe. They are exclaiming in horror at the attitide conveyed by the article, that showing off with these subs and terrorizing NK with them is good and we should be proud of it. I also see this as pretty barbaric behaviour. That sub has enough nukes on it to probably turn to glass every population centre in NK. Isn’t that terrifying?
NK poses no real harm, they are desperately trying to catch up with their military, probably because they are surrounded by American weapons. The only thing that NK has been taught by the international community is that you have to have nukes and be a bully to be successful. Following the example of the US. I’m not sure whether or not that poster is from Russia has much to do with what they wrote, and for the record, I found it perfectly legible.
„NK poses no real harm“ the people suffering under a brutal militaristic dictatorship. Starving and possibly worked to their death if they disagree even slightly with the state or dare to question their leader might disagree.
I did neglect to mention I meant external harm. But I wonder does surrounding them with guns and nukes make their state more likely to demilitarize? I feel like it does not.
Fair enough, I mean they are also increasingly posing a threat to external entities, didn’t a recent missile test fly over Japan? But in general I do not think NK is a positive influence on the world, much less once they can build and deploy nuclear weapons. In any case the original article really isn’t news as the us has the ability to strike basically anywhere on the planet with nuclear weapons. But I do agree that it won’t have a demilitarizing effect, however I doubt anything could have.