|
|
Post by Swampy on Apr 5, 2014 10:45:21 GMT -5
I don't know if this is true, but I would support it. |
|
|
|
Post by dry on Apr 5, 2014 13:06:51 GMT -5
I don't know if this is true, but I would support it. I would as well support this military-political move. |
|
|
|
Post by hornet32 on Apr 5, 2014 18:00:22 GMT -5
Neither know what your talking about , China is N.Koreas ally China and Japan are sworn enemies , there is nothing there for Americans , but Russia has an interest .
|
|
|
|
Post by Swampy on Apr 5, 2014 18:09:35 GMT -5
Neither know what your talking about , China is N.Koreas ally China and Japan are sworn enemies , there is nothing there for Americans , but Russia has an interest . There is a lot at stake for America - if North Korea can lob shells at Japan, it can hurt her economy and cause uncertainty in the world. It can furthermore cause security fears in South Korea, who will spend even more money arming herself. |
|
|
|
Post by hornet32 on Apr 5, 2014 18:46:02 GMT -5
For N.Korea to fire missals at Japan , shells won't go that far , it would serve no purpose .
|
|
|
|
Post by dry on Apr 6, 2014 10:29:03 GMT -5
To my knowledge, without advanced knowledge, one cannot build nuclear warheads bigger than a few kilotons; and N-Korea is known still to be at this a couple of kilotons stage.
They cannot really nuclear bomb Japan, even if they will get their missiles working. But in international politics, the mere existence of a threat is significant, I mean even if the threat is not really grand, as it is not grand in this case.
Of course it makes much sense to protect the population of Japan from even a potential and not very grand nuclear threat, militarily.
In WWI the British navy had the policy of a "fleet in being"; the mere existence of the big British navy influenced the global military events, even without shooting a single shell.
AJY
|
|
