Therefore we can't think of the utilisation other than 100% military purposes as to what uranium concentration technique by North Korea is aiming at.
Technically speaking, you are very correct, but it is also true that the very utilisation of military purposes allows the countries concerned to have equilibrium of powers, and eventually contributes to peace in the region.
-- Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters
We were able to prevent war by having the willingness to hold nuclear weapons or holding the weapons of mass destruction including nuclear weapons. We can find those cases as many as the cases we were unable to prevent war.
This is a very important point. Normally we tend to believe that we have to start war because they have already developed weapons of mass destruction including nuclear weapons. But the fact is that because they have already developed weapons of mass destruction including nuclear weapons, we are unable to start war, thus preventing further conflict between them and us. This is an irony of history, though, it's true.
Sadam Hussein lost a nuclear facility which was purchased from France and Germany (in 1980s) by bombing of Israel (in 1980s).
I didn't know that, though I've got to look it up when the purchase and bombing were taken place.
Korean peninsula seems under high tension regardless of whether there're nuclear weapons.
It depends on how we see the situation there, I don't believe both current administrations are antagonistic to one another.
-- Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters
Eventually Leads To Peace In The Region (スコア:1)
Technically speaking, you are very correct, but it is also true that the very utilisation of military purposes allows the countries concerned to have equilibrium of powers, and eventually contributes to peace in the region.
Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters
Re:Eventually Leads To Peace In The Region (スコア:1)
第一に、核兵器を保有することによって、緊張が緩和したことは歴史上存在しないことだ。確かに、冷戦期には米ソは巨大な核戦力を保有することによって、直接対立することはなかった。しかし、それは単に戦時ではないという消極的な平和に止まり、ベルリン危機からマルタ会談までの約50年間に渡って両国は緊張関係にあった。1969年には、お互いに核兵器を保有しているソビエトと中国は、ダマンスキー島を巡り大規模な戦争を行っているし、冷戦期であっても米ソは第三世界において、代理戦争を繰り広
Re:Eventually Leads To Peace In The Region (スコア:1)
I don't raise any questions as to your assertion. All right, but can't we say that you see we have had war in history by not holding nuclear weapons?
Even if North & South Korea held nuclear weapons, and even if we could achieve negative peace in the region, that does not lead to detente.
Don't you think that the negative peace is equal to detente?
The third point is that even if nuclear weapons kept a military balance
Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters
Re:Eventually Leads To Peace In The Region (スコア:1)
核兵器を含む大量破壊兵器を保有、または保有の意思を持ったことによって戦争が防げたという例は、戦争を防げなかった例と同じくらい多い。例えば、サダム･フセインは1980年代にフランスとドイツから購入した核施設をイスラエルの爆撃によって失っているし、イラク戦争においても(ブッシュ政権の大量破壊兵器の有無の主張は別としても)、開戦の動機は大量破壊兵器の保有であった
核兵器を
Re:Eventually Leads To Peace In The Region (スコア:1)
This is a very important point. Normally we tend to believe that we have to start war because they have already developed weapons of mass destruction including nuclear weapons. But the fact is that because they have already developed weapons of mass destruction including nuclear weapons, we are unable to start war, thus preventing further conflict between them and us. This is an irony of history, though, it's true.
Sadam Hussein lost a nuclear facility which was purchased from France and Germany (in 1980s) by bombing of Israel (in 1980s).
I didn't know that, though I've got to look it up when the purchase and bombing were taken place.
Korean peninsula seems under high tension regardless of whether there're nuclear weapons.
It depends on how we see the situation there, I don't believe both current administrations are antagonistic to one another.
Ancient Greek Philosophers -18c Enlightenment Thinkers -Slashdotters