Let's see how much Jow Forums trusts the US

If you were NK's leader, would you give up your nuclear weapons for an agreement with the US?

Attached: 2016-07-19_nukes.png (890x668, 106K)

Other urls found in this thread:

armscontrol.org/factsheets/Russian-Strategic-Nuclear-Forces-Under-New-START
twitter.com/AnonBabble

Just look at Lybia

pourquoi la bombe anglaise a-t-elle une couleur différent ?

Fake news, American propaganda
>As of February 2018, Russia had 527 deployed delivery systems and 1,444 deployed strategic nuclear warheads.
armscontrol.org/factsheets/Russian-Strategic-Nuclear-Forces-Under-New-START

Hell no.

That being said I wouldn't know what to do with them either. I mean: obviously he isn't going to use them unless pushed against the wall.

We gave up on nukes.
It was a fatal mistake.

To mark their superiority over France.

I'd try to give the weapons to SK, actually, and have them reunite the peninsula.

If I had to give up nukes the agreement would include dismantling of the regime and sparing me and my pals. Nobody is daft enough to believe they will be safer w/o nukes. Not after Ukraine, Lybia etc.

Every Ukrainian says that. You think USA or Russia would let you exist if you didn't?

It's would be taken away by force anyway.

Why the UK head is redder than ours?

Attached: 828b3ce730d2.jpg (640x475, 63K)

>Israel has nukes

Dumb antisemite slander

Real question is, why does Israel, Pakistan and India have nukes?

Why the fuck is the UK red?
Also hell no.

Nukes are useless anyway, since you can't use them. Using a nuke = signing your country's death penalty.

They will overtake you in 2050

It was fucked up, but negotiable if we had a knowledge of a future rivalry with Russia. Or ask USA to let us in NATO.
Thing is, we didn't know that.
>by force
Not really. But then again, until 2014 the reasoning under cutting military and nukes was valid, we literally had no enemies near. We can only retroactively regret.

Besides, the only country which won from giving up nukes was South Africa since now niggers won't be dropping nukes on whites.

We could get away with it. Maybe Russia or China too.

nukes is a guarantee that your country won't be attacked in a massive way
also they are cheaper than mass production of conventional weapons (if you doesn't count rockets and supersonic planes)
I think it was a requirement that can not be rejected. All republics lost their nukes - Lithuania, Latvia, Kazakhstan and others.
For South Africa missiles were a chance to survive. They were under international sanctions and had border wars in Angola/botswana/Namibia

Hell no, look what happened to Ghaddafi.

Literally Obama's greatest fuckup was killing that guy.

You have no business being independent from Russia. Neither you nor Belarus.

Not sure what that's supported by, but that's what google says.

>would you give up your nuclear weapons
yes
>for an agreement with the US
no

>nukes is a guarantee that your country won't be attacked in a massive way
I tried this in Civ V and it worked like a charm. Just 8 nukes was enough to keep the AI in a negotiating mood all the time.

SK actually has a large chunk of weapons grade material due to their civilian prpgram, and likely have the tech to seriously upgrade the missiles.

A reunited Korea with the nuclear program being given joint command with full disclosure is really the best option.

>Besides, the only country which won from giving up nukes was South Africa since now niggers won't be dropping nukes on whites.
Uh no sweetie, Aprtheid SA lost when they pussied out and didnt develop delivery systems with range to hit the USA, and then murdered all the niggers.

all the world was against them, not only USA though

Yes and? Your point? They had enough food to feed themselves and the industry to supply themselves and the resources. Enough range to tickle the US would be enough range to hit anybody, which would give them freedom to kick niggers out of the military and then just kick them out.

>2nd from last

undo these tears

>SK actually has a large chunk of weapons grade material due to their civilian prpgram, and likely have the tech to seriously upgrade the missiles.
This applies to every developed country that has reactors for research and power generation. Even fucking Finland could develop nukes if they lost their minds.

Things have changed a lot since then. Everyone was clamoring to kill the guy like how they supported the Iraq War. There was a video that surfaced showing Trump wanting to kill the gaddafi too.

>If you were NK's leader, would you give up your nuclear weapons for an agreement with the US?

No. I would first ask America to move from South Korean soil 100%

Their economy was falling under sanctions and they had no other choice

Attached: income.jpg (800x368, 32K)

sorry wrong post

>If you were NK's leader, would you give up your nuclear weapons for an agreement with the US?
Yes and I would reform the nation to better serve the people as opposed to them being glorified slaves, eventually hoping to create a democratic nation.
Because I'm not the kims.

They were in zero danger of starving to death.

Only if you have a 100% safe ICBM shield and don't care about world opinion.

Hell fucking no, I am not retarded.

Huh?

Seems like the nuke is a fast track deal for other... trades

This

Attached: 1521138326497.png (2618x3453, 3.99M)