Author |
Share Topic Topic Search Topic Options
|
Ponce de Leon
Caliph
Lonce De Peon
Joined: 11-Jan-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2967
|
Quote Reply
Topic: Who is the next member of the atomic club? Posted: 16-Mar-2006 at 13:42 |
I would like your opinions on who is the next country that will develop "the bomb." According to news, talks, and gossip it seems inevitable that this club is going to gain a new member in a number of years. That fact in itself is scary.
I leave your worries, and your good opions to be shared with everyone right here@!
|
|
Iranian41ife
Arch Duke
Joined: 24-Dec-2005
Location: Tajikista
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1832
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 16-Mar-2006 at 13:48 |
north korea, but they are already in the club. other than that, i dont think there are any nations planning on building the bomb.
|
"If they attack Iran, of course I will fight. But I will be fighting to defend Iran... my land. I will not be fighting for the government and the nuclear cause." ~ Hamid, veteran of the Iran Iraq War
|
|
pikeshot1600
Tsar
Joined: 22-Jan-2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4221
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 16-Mar-2006 at 13:51 |
It is widely assumed with some validity that South Africa dismantled its nuclear inventory. That said, just about any power that wants to spend the money can have nukes, if others let them.
That all depends, as usual, on those others' collective interests.
Still, I doubt it can be stopped permanently. My guess, in view of current trends and rhetoric in east Asia, is that the next member of the "club" will be Japan.
|
|
Iranian41ife
Arch Duke
Joined: 24-Dec-2005
Location: Tajikista
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1832
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 16-Mar-2006 at 14:09 |
Originally posted by pikeshot1600
It is widely assumed with some validity that South Africa dismantled its nuclear inventory. That said, just about any power that wants to spend the money can have nukes, if others let them.
That all depends, as usual, on those others' collective interests.
Still, I doubt it can be stopped permanently. My guess, in view of current trends and rhetoric in east Asia, is that the next member of the "club" will be Japan.
|
south africa was given 6 nukes by israel but nelson mandela rejected the israeli offer.
technically, japan and germany are part of the club already, they ahve all the technology, they have the uranium inriched and they even have the bomb parts. they just havent put them together.
from what i read, japan has the ability to produce a hundred nukes in fifteen minutes. they have everything prepared, all they are waiting is the put them together, if there is a threat that is.
|
"If they attack Iran, of course I will fight. But I will be fighting to defend Iran... my land. I will not be fighting for the government and the nuclear cause." ~ Hamid, veteran of the Iran Iraq War
|
|
Suren
Arch Duke
Chieftain
Joined: 10-Feb-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1673
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 16-Mar-2006 at 18:18 |
Egypt
|
Anfører
|
|
azimuth
Caliph
SlaYer'S SlaYer
Joined: 12-Dec-2004
Location: Neutral Zone
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2979
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 16-Mar-2006 at 18:34 |
Originally posted by sirius99
Egypt |
dont think so, at least not with this government
i wonder why canada and some of the european countries who doesnt have nuks have them now?
|
|
|
Maju
King
Joined: 14-Jul-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6565
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 16-Mar-2006 at 18:56 |
North Korea and Israel are in, and so are India and Pakistan. The next one will surely be Iran bt I guess that sooner than later evry middle sized state will have a sizeable arsenal with long range. I think that the following will eventually become members almost compulsively: - Brazil
- Mexico
- Venezuela
- South Africa
- Nigeria (if they stay united)
- Egypt
- Turkey
- Saudi Arabia
- Iraq
- Morocco
- Algeria
- Germany
- Italy
- Spain
- Poland
- Sweden
- Ukraine
- Thailand
- Indonesia
- South Korea
- Vietnam
- Burma
It's just the toy that "everybody must have"
|
NO GOD, NO MASTER!
|
|
DukeC
Arch Duke
Joined: 07-Nov-2005
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1564
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 16-Mar-2006 at 19:01 |
Originally posted by azimuth
Originally posted by sirius99
Egypt |
dont think so, at least not with this government
i wonder why canada and some of the european countries who doesnt have nuks have them now?
|
Nukes have been a political hot potato in Canada for years. During the Cold War Canadian Forces deployed several nuclear systems. The Bomarc was a nuke tipped SAM, but the warheads were removed in the mid sixties by the Liberal government. Canada also deployed the Lance missile in Europe but never really armed the missiles. Sandbags were put in place of the tactical atom bomb warheads. I don't think they would have been very effective. The longest deployed nukes were air-dropped depth charges but these were removed from service in the 80s. All these weapons were built by the U.S. and more or less lent to Canada.
|
|
azimuth
Caliph
SlaYer'S SlaYer
Joined: 12-Dec-2004
Location: Neutral Zone
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2979
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 16-Mar-2006 at 19:14 |
Originally posted by Maju
It's just the toy that "everybody must have"
|
why is that you think?
|
|
|
Sino Defender
Baron
Joined: 23-Jan-2006
Location: Hong Kong
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 413
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 16-Mar-2006 at 19:15 |
Originally posted by Maju
North Korea and Israel are in, and so are India and Pakistan. The next one will surely be Iran bt I guess that sooner than later evry middle sized state will have a sizeable arsenal with long range.
I think that the following will eventually become members almost compulsively:
- Brazil
- Mexico
- Venezuela
- South Africa
- Nigeria (if they stay united)
- Egypt
- Turkey
- Saudi Arabia
- Iraq
- Morocco
- Algeria
- Germany
- Italy
- Spain
- Poland
- Sweden
- Ukraine
- Thailand
- Indonesia
- South Korea
- Vietnam
- Burma
It's just the toy that "everybody must have"
|
why burma? it's such a small and poor country. no offense but that's true. there's no way they will have the technology to do so.
|
"Whoever messes with the heavenly middle kingdom, no matter how far s/he escapes, s/he is to be slaughtered"
|
|
Maju
King
Joined: 14-Jul-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6565
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 16-Mar-2006 at 19:25 |
Burma has almost 60 million people, they are 23rd in the world. If North Korea has, why not Burma?
But I agree that following this reason I could have included Bangla Desh, Argentina or others...
It's just speculative.
|
NO GOD, NO MASTER!
|
|
Constantine XI
Suspended
Suspended
Joined: 01-May-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5711
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 17-Mar-2006 at 02:38 |
Australia likewise has everything it needs, including 40% of the
world's supply of uranium and the 13th largest military budget in the
world. She lacks only the desire to build one. If the ability of the US
to act as a security umbrella for Australia was to be withdrawn, the
substitution of the US alliance with a nuclear arsenal may become a
possibility. For the forseeable future it is unlikely that the alliance
will rupture, however.
|
|
Sino Defender
Baron
Joined: 23-Jan-2006
Location: Hong Kong
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 413
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 17-Mar-2006 at 03:51 |
Originally posted by Maju
Burma has almost 60 million people, they are 23rd in the world. If North Korea has, why not Burma?
But I agree that following this reason I could have included Bangla Desh, Argentina or others...
It's just speculative.
|
having a large population doesn't necessarily mean it is capable enough of developing nuclear warheads. burma and bangladesh do not have the economic and technical resources to support such a development. north korea, on the other hand, allocates such a huge portion of its gdp to support the project.
|
"Whoever messes with the heavenly middle kingdom, no matter how far s/he escapes, s/he is to be slaughtered"
|
|
Leonidas
Tsar
Joined: 01-Oct-2005
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4613
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 17-Mar-2006 at 05:27 |
Originally posted by Constantine XI
Australia likewise has everything it needs, including 40% of the
world's supply of uranium and the 13th largest military budget in the
world. She lacks only the desire to build one. If the ability of the US
to act as a security umbrella for Australia was to be withdrawn, the
substitution of the US alliance with a nuclear arsenal may become a
possibility. For the forseeable future it is unlikely that the alliance
will rupture, however.
|
we defanitly can put one together if we wanted to. Ballistic technology may be more problematic but the technical know how and materails are all there. Ive heard small scale (private) scientific tests had been done in Sth korea and i think tawain that 'breached' the rules. Either way like Japan they have the know how to do so.
|
|
Leonidas
Tsar
Joined: 01-Oct-2005
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4613
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 17-Mar-2006 at 05:46 |
Rumours have it that the saudi's are able to acquire the technology/bomb via Pakistan becase they helped bankrole pakistans project in the first place. Infact im pretty worried that they seem to fall under the radar Egypt is interested in nuke technology but not weapons for now while algeria is another long term suspect. Apperantly libya was more advance in its pursuit of nukes than what the US thought, but was stopped in its tracks when the pakistan nuke network got rolled up. Turkey wont have much choice if the iranians and arabs get theirs. Morroco Burma Indonesia Nigeria Iraq should be taken of that list. they simply dont have the ability or needs you'd be already stretching it with thailand poland Venezuela
Edited by Leonidas
|
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 17-Mar-2006 at 06:15 |
Originally posted by Maju
But I agree that following this reason I could have included Bangla Desh, Argentina or others... |
Argentina had a nuclear program running during the military dictatorship, but it was abandoned in the late 1980's.
And because Argentina wanted a nuke, Brazil wanted to have one too. The Brazilean nuclear program was cancelled as well.
Edited by Mixcoatl
|
|
pikeshot1600
Tsar
Joined: 22-Jan-2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4221
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 17-Mar-2006 at 09:19 |
Originally posted by Mixcoatl
Originally posted by Maju
But I agree that following this reason I could have included Bangla Desh, Argentina or others... |
Argentina had a nuclear program running during the military dictatorship, but it was abandoned in the late 1980's.
And because Argentina wanted a nuke, Brazil wanted to have one too. The Brazilean nuclear program was cancelled as well.
|
It was the cost. Latin America in general was ready to implode financially in the 1980s. Anyway, those countries are much better off using resources for other things. Neither of them is strategically threatened by the other (and no they are not threatened by gringos either).
|
|
flyingzone
Caliph
Joined: 11-Dec-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2630
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 17-Mar-2006 at 13:08 |
Some suspect that Taiwan also has it. But such claim is unsubstantiated.
|
|
Genghis
Caliph
Joined: 02-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2656
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 17-Mar-2006 at 13:16 |
Originally posted by flyingzone
Some suspect that Taiwan also has it. But such claim is unsubstantiated. |
Regardless, I wouldn't be surprised if they have had such a program. They might even start one up fairly soon as China's conventional military might increases. It probably wouldn't be ICBM's, but IRBM's and cruise missiles and aircraft bombs.
|
Member of IAEA
|
|
Mortaza
Tsar
Joined: 21-Jul-2005
Location: Turkey
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3711
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 17-Mar-2006 at 13:33 |
Turkey wont have much choice if the iranians and arabs get theirs.
True most probably at near future, we will try to get nuke too. Our trust to nato is decreased. So we have no choice to protect ourself against nukes.
|
|