| ▲ | hearsathought 16 hours ago | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
[flagged] | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | tyre 16 hours ago | parent | next [-] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
America is doing South Korea a favor. It could ratchet sanctions (see: Iran) and ravage SK’s position and economic power on the global stage without its sign-off. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | JumpCrisscross 15 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
> Or maybe Korea could be like India...and not be part of it Sure. That comes with costs. Cost that may not make sense for Korea, which is a defense exporter globally and within the American-led Pacific alliance. (Operating a nuclear shipyard and supply chain is incredibly expensive. It's would also be a high-value target for Pyongynag.) > your native country Is this a troll account? (EDIT: 4 months old. Peeked through comment history. All flamebait and racism. Flagged.) > a loophole seoul doesn't need You're using the word "need" ambiguously. It's a loophole Seoul benefits from. It gets the benefits of being an NPT signatory and alliance member. And it gets nuclear submarines. We can debate the costs and benefits. But Seoul wasn't coerced into building a nuclear submarine. Put plainly, it's unclear what security benefits it gets from one given it doesn't project into blue waters. > You act like america is doing korea a favor Within narrow confines, it is. Within broader confines, it's acting as the senior security partner. That obviously involves a cession of sovereignty. Same goes for Pakistan vis-a-vis China, or Belarus with Russia. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||