It is not against China or north korea, but Asian democraties must have their own nukes or the US&|NATO must guarantee we will die with them if they are attacked, namely provide a "nuclear umbrella" via a treaty.
I think it's also acceptable for the country to just be advanced enough that everyone knows they could build nukes very quickly if it came down to it.
Japan has the American nuclear umbrella, but it's also obvious to most people interested in the topic that if faced with an existential threat and if for some reason the US didn't fulfill its treaty obligations, Japan could build its own bombs within a year or two.
What? Are you saying that a potential attacker would preemptively nuke Japan before tensions escalate if Japan started developing nukes? Because if so, what ridiculous world do you live in? That'd be like Russia flat out nuking Ukraine last year instead of bothering with an invasion.
I am uncertain that more nuclear weapons in the hands of more groups will ultimately lead to more safety. While I understand the desire for self defense and MAD, it only takes the dissolving of one nation into a radical group with a truly unhinged leader to then have the power to wipe millions of the face of the earth. Rolling more dice seems like it makes nuclear apocalypse more likely.
You people already tried this in 1994. Ukraine gave up their nukes and got invaded anyway. Good luck convincing any other country to give up their nukes.
If NK has nukes then why can't SK and Japan have some too?
I do not question the effectiveness of deterring with nuclear weapons. It would be great if Ukraine had nuclear weapons... for now. How long till a nation state becomes unstable. How long can any entity remain in control of itself. Hell, I don't trust my own country the US to have these weapons and we have the longest track record of not ending the world. But at some point there will be revolution on every country. My source is all of human history. One radical group getting ahold of these weapons with actual intent to use them is all it takes to change the face of the world.
>I am uncertain that more nuclear weapons in the hands of more groups will ultimately lead to more safety.
Try to tell Ukraine this, if they had nukes then a lot of people would be alive. But I understand your point if your country already has nukes or it does not have imperialist/aggressive countries as neighbors.
But to get protected from the insane empire neighbor IMo this days you do not longer need super complex rockets, a ton of small drones with dirty bombs in it wold also do a good job preventing an invasion, you need to first prove the world how effective it is.
It is not against China or north korea, but Asian democraties must have their own nukes or the US&|NATO must guarantee we will die with them if they are attacked, namely provide a "nuclear umbrella" via a treaty.
Rockets is only the first step for nuke delivery.