韓國是否應該發(fā)展自己的核武庫？他們被三個敵對的核大國包圍。為什么韓國至今沒有實施核計劃？

CaiLei Follow
After the reunification of South Korea and North Korea, they had their own nuclear arsenal.
North Korea has only one hypothetical enemy - Japan. (You only need to pay attention to the direction of each North Korean missile test launch to understand)
The North Koreans could launch missiles into the stratosphere and then descend vertically at supersonic speeds, a method that could quickly penetrate Japan's missile defenses. This method is similar to the "Tathagata Divine Palm".
North Korea's nuclear weapons are not aimed at South Korea, and South Koreans do not need to be Self-motivated (don't flatter yourself).

韓朝統(tǒng)一后，他們就都有了自己的核武器庫。
朝鮮只有一個假想敵人——日本。（只要留意朝鮮每次導彈試射的方向就能明白）
朝鮮人可以將導彈發(fā)射到平流層，然后以超音速垂直下降，這種方法可以快速突破日本的導彈防御系統(tǒng)。這種方法類似于“如來神掌”。
朝鮮的核武器不是針對韓國的，韓國人也不需要自以為是（別自以為是了）。

North Korea is not rich. North Koreans do not need expensive missiles to defeat the South Korean army, only a few pistols are enough.
Blue House raid - Wikipedia
It’s not that I look down on Korea’s sissy army. South Korea's armed forces are simply no match for North Korea's armed forces without the intervention of the U.S. armed forces.
Of course, if the US military intervenes in the conflict on the Korean Peninsula, China will also intervene.
But if the United States and China do not intervene in the affairs of the Korean Peninsula, then there is no doubt that North Korea will defeat South Korea and completely unify the Korean Peninsula.

朝鮮并不富裕，朝鮮人不需要昂貴的導彈就能打敗韓國軍隊，幾把手槍就夠了。
青瓦臺突襲-維基百科（鏈接）
不是我看不起韓國娘娘腔的軍隊，沒有美軍的介入，韓國軍隊根本就不是朝鮮軍隊的對手。
當然，如果美軍介入朝鮮半島沖突，中國也會介入。
但如果美國和中國不介入朝鮮半島事務，那么朝鮮打敗韓國，徹底統(tǒng)一朝鮮半島是毫無疑問的。

Mchue
This person that raised this question got it all wrong. South Koreans had been a very nice country surrounded by countries that can protect them all along, until they made a stupid mistake by going to election by just tossing a coin.

提出這個問題的人完全搞錯了。韓國一直是一個非常好的國家，周圍都是可以保護他們的國家，直到他們犯了一個愚蠢的錯誤，用拋硬幣的方式進行選舉。

Alan Brown
Mexico is next to the most war loving country in the world and there has been talks of invading Mexico. I think Mexico should develop its own nukes before they are being invaded

墨西哥身處世界上最好戰(zhàn)的國家旁邊，而且也一直有墨西哥要被入侵的傳聞。我認為墨西哥應該在被入侵之前開發(fā)自己的核武器。

KK Ang
NK thousands of units of artillery is enough to cover whole of Seoul. Why would they try to nuke SK that is just 35miles from the Korean border? There will be nuclear fallout.

朝鮮數(shù)千門火炮足以覆蓋整個首爾。他們?yōu)槭裁匆獙嚯x朝鮮邊境僅35英里的韓國首都進行核打擊？這會產(chǎn)生核輻射的。

Traveling Scholar
Ah yes, because Mig-15s will totally beat KF-16s and F-35s. WW2 era frigates will totally beat AEGIS destroyers. T-55s will totally beat K2 Black Panthers. If that is considered advanced and powerful technology by you Chinese… well, now I know we Americans have nothing to fear from China.

啊，是的，因為米格 15 會完全擊敗 KF-16 和 F-35。二戰(zhàn)時期的護衛(wèi)艦會完全擊敗宙斯盾驅(qū)逐艦。T-55 會完全擊敗 K2、黑豹。如果你們中國人認為這是先進而強大的技術...那么，現(xiàn)在我知道我們美國人不必害怕中國了。

Sketchy Kid
USS Pueblo (AGER-2) - Wikipedia
The answer to your questions is - YES
Here's one more example for you:
Let me remind you. North Korea is a nuclear power and these guys on a photo are “sandal wearing goat herders”.

普韋布洛號驅(qū)逐艦 - 維基百科
你的問題的答案是 - 是的
這里還有一個例子：
讓我提醒你。朝鮮是一個核大國，照片上的這些人是“穿涼鞋的牧羊人”。
注：普韋布洛號驅(qū)逐艦是一艘旗幟級環(huán)境研究船，在第二次世界大戰(zhàn)期間投入使用，隨后于 1967年被改裝為間諜船...

Halfman Huang
I think, you hasn’t figured out one thing, fighter drones and suicide drones have already changed situation, it give the low military tech countries a cheap air force, and the most important thing, the Battlefield Perception Capability they lacked in the past.
That means, in the future, not only the US army can call the air support, Afghan shepherds also can. This leveled the tactical ability of the both side, The theory of air supremacy has been completely shattered.
So, does the US soldiers already prepared to been air striked by Afghan shepherds or North Koreans in combats?

我想，你沒搞清楚一件事，戰(zhàn)斗機和自殺式無人機已經(jīng)改變了現(xiàn)狀，讓軍事技術水平低的國家擁有了廉價的空軍，最重要的是，他們擁有了過去所缺乏的戰(zhàn)場感知能力。
這意味著，未來不僅美軍可以呼叫空中支援，阿富汗牧羊人也可以。這拉平了雙方的戰(zhàn)術能力，空中優(yōu)勢理論被徹底擊碎。
那么，美軍士兵是否已經(jīng)做好了在戰(zhàn)斗中遭到阿富汗牧羊人或朝鮮人空襲的準備？

All about Korea · Follow

Should South Korea also have nuclear weapons?
Agree: 66.8%
opposed: 31.8%

韓國也應該擁有核武器嗎？
同意：66.8%
反對：31.8%

Should South Korea withhold its own nuclear weapons?
very agree: 29.8%
agreeable: 26.7%
opposing: 16.7%
very opposite: 24.0
I don't know: 2.7%
Throughout the past, public opinion supporting that Korea should become nuclear-armed has never fallen below a majority
Just because of the political situation, diplomatic situation, and economic issues, Korea is not arming itself with nuclear weapons, It actually attempted to develop nuclear weapons 50 years ago, and is currently not proceeding with it, but if we decide to do so, we will complete nuclear armament within an extremely short time (expected within about a year) can do
This public opinion is based on concerns about North Korea's nuclear armament and doubts and skepticism about whether the nuclear umbrella will work and whether it will have deterrent power
It is also based on the idea of increasing South Korea's cards against pressure and threats from neighboring countries, which is inherent in the fundamental distrust of the nuclear umbrella, "The U.S. will not give up South Korea for fear of North Korea, but will it protect Seoul at the risk of an all-out nuclear war with China?"
This is an answer that no one can say for sure, and an unsettling question that cannot be resolved, Unless North Korea and China evaporate or the threat is comprehensively resolved, public opinion on South Korea's nuclear armament will continue to exist

韓國是否應保留自己的核武器？
非常同意：29.8%
贊同：26.7%
反對：16.7%
非常反對：24.0
不知道：2.7%
縱觀歷史，支持韓國應該擁有核武器的輿論從未低于多數(shù)。
只是因為政治形勢、外交形勢和經(jīng)濟問題，韓國并沒有用核武器武裝自己，實際上它50年前就試圖發(fā)展核武器，目前沒有繼續(xù)進行，但如果決定這樣做，我們將在極短的時間內(nèi)（預計一年左右）完成核武裝。
這種輿論是基于對朝鮮核武裝的擔憂，以及對核保護傘是否有效、是否具有威懾力的懷疑和質(zhì)疑。
也是基于增加韓國對抗鄰國壓力和威脅的底牌的想法，這是對核保護傘的根本不信任所固有的，“美國不會因為害怕朝鮮而放棄韓國，但它會冒著與中國發(fā)生全面核戰(zhàn)爭的風險來保護首爾嗎？”
這是一個沒有人能確定的答案，也是一個無法解決的令人不安的問題，除非朝鮮和中國消失或威脅得到全面解決，否則公眾對韓國核武器的輿論將繼續(xù)存在。

In fact, South Korea had attempted its own nuclear armament program. Since 1970, the Korean government has continued to carry out secret projects, but In 1974, when India succeeded in a nuclear test, U.S. officials and CIA agents followed the heads of state ministries, including the Blue House, the Ministry of National Defense, and the Ministry of Science and Technology, as well as nuclear armament-related facilities such as the Korea Atomic Energy Research Institute, the Defense Research Institute, and the Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology. According to Chief Oh Won-chul, the move was made to avoid U.S. checks. It is said that it was divided into seven projects, allowing information judgment only at Cheong Wa Dae(presidential palace), the control tower

事實上，韓國也曾嘗試過自己的核武器計劃。1970年以后，韓國政府繼續(xù)秘密進行核試驗，但1974年印度成功進行核試驗后，美國官員和CIA特工開始嚴密監(jiān)視青瓦臺、國防部、科技部等國家部委首腦以及韓國原子能研究院、國防研究院、韓國科學技術研究院等核武器相關設施負責人。據(jù)吳元哲局長稱，韓國的核開發(fā)被分為7個項目，只允許青瓦臺進行情報判斷，據(jù)說此舉是為了避開美國的檢查。

In 1975, the Park Chung-hee administration signed the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, and the construction of Wolseong No. 1, the Candu reactor in question, was safely started. The following year, in 1976, Park Chung-hee surrendered to U.S. pressure that "if he goes to the very end, he has no choice but to impose decisive sanctions." Former U.S. Ambassador Donald Gragg described the U.S. way of putting pressure on North Korea in 2011, saying, "It was just like the U.S. trying to contain its nuclear development." In addition, former Prime Minister Kim Jong-pil uated that the U.S. intelligence was not excellent, but that "Korean spies told the CIA." At the same time, the reprocessing agreement with France was broken, and by 1977, nuclear development had ceased. Former U.S. Ambassador Donald Gragg has since affirmed that there has been no attempt by South Korea to arm itself with nuclear weapons. In the meantime, the level of pressure from the United States was enough to destroy the Korea-U.S. mutual defense treaty

1975年，樸正熙政府簽署了《不擴散核武器條約》，月城一號核反應堆（即坎杜反應堆）安全開工。次年，也就是1976年，樸正熙屈服于美國的壓力，稱“如果堅持到底，就別無選擇，只能承受決定性制裁”。美國前大使唐納德·格拉格在2011年描述美國對韓國施壓的方式時說：“這就像美國試圖遏制朝鮮核開發(fā)一樣”。此外，韓國前總理金鐘泌評價說，美國的情報并不完善，但“韓國間諜將情報告訴了美國中央情報局”。與此同時，與法國的核后處理協(xié)議被打破，到1977年，核開發(fā)已經(jīng)停止。美國前大使唐納德·格拉格此后斷言，韓國從未試圖擁有核武器。與此同時，美國的壓力足以摧毀韓美共同防御條約。

Because of this strong pressure from the United States, we were unable to proceed further with the development of nuclear weapons and reached the present.
Currently we are weighing the real/potential threats and what we can lose
Unless there is a strong change in the situation, we will not give up our stance on denuclearization because the economic prosperity we would lose is too great
But what about China?
If both sides of the Straits are really on fire, we might proceed with nuclear armament, Of course, that's just an assumption... it shouldn't happen

因為美國的這種強大壓力，我們無法繼續(xù)發(fā)展核武器，只能落到現(xiàn)在的地步。
目前我們正在權衡現(xiàn)實/潛在威脅和可能失去的東西。
除非情況發(fā)生重大變化，否則我們不會放棄無核化的立場，因為我們將失去的經(jīng)濟繁榮太大了。
但中國呢？
如果海峽兩岸真的戰(zhàn)火紛飛，我們可能會繼續(xù)進行核軍備，當然，這只是假設...不應該發(fā)生。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://equalizerredsea.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處

Albert Dye Follow
The American elite will not allow it.
If South Korea had their own nuclear deterrent they could start to act independently from the whims of the American elite and this outcome could be tolerated.
Every country with an America military base has basically given up it sovereignty, these bases are used to project American power across the globe.
Name one non-American NATO member airbase in America?

美國精英不會允許這種事情發(fā)生。
如果韓國擁有自己的核威懾力量，他們就可以開始獨立行動，不受美國精英的左右，這種結(jié)果是可以容忍的。
每個擁有美國軍事基地的國家基本上都放棄了主權，這些基地被用來向全球投射美國的力量。
說出一個非美國的北約成員國在美國擁有空軍基地的國家？

Albert Dye
Not so, the ordinary people don’t want them .. it’s the only corrupt elite that welcome them in with open arms.
I for one don’t want to give this corrupt organisation (NATO) 2% of our GDP so a bunch of crooks can have a good life at our expense.

事實并非如此，普通民眾不想要他們...只有腐敗的精英才會張開雙臂歡迎他們。
就我個人而言，我不想把我們GDP的2% 交給這個腐敗的組織（北約），讓一群騙子以犧牲我們?yōu)榇鷥r過上好日子。

Traveling Scholar
Mate, every American base is there by invitation of the host country. Are you actually this dense?

兄弟，每個美國基地都是受東道國邀請建立的。你真的這么蠢嗎？

Youngin Pyo Follow
Yeah, SK should, but international politics is not that simple so that SK is free to make the decision. If I am the decision-maker, I would go in that direction. I think SK will go in that direction in the end if any country uses nukes, SK would have a legilimate circumstance for that decision. For example, the circumstance would be created if Russia uses nukes in Ukraine.

是的，韓國應該這么做，但國際政治并不那么簡單，韓國無法自由做出決定。如果我是決策者，我會朝那個方向走。我認為，如果任何國家使用核武器，韓國最終都會朝那個方向走，韓國將有一個合法的決策環(huán)境。例如，如果俄羅斯在烏克蘭使用核武器，就會產(chǎn)生這種情況。

Joseph Boyle Follow
South Korea does not primarily because it works within an alliance structure which serves its defense needs and does not require domestic development of nuclear weapons.
The main pressure towards it is the strong competitive feelings within East Asia. If North Korea and China have nuclear weapons, naturally many South Koreans will feel they should too. In turn, many Chinese feel they should compete with the US nuclear arsenal.
However regional arms race is an expensive and ultimately unproductive situation. This is why so many regions have made their own NWFZ treaties.
Nuclear-weapon-free zone - Wikipedia

韓國之所以不這么做，主要是因為它在一個滿足其國防需求的聯(lián)盟結(jié)構內(nèi)工作，不需要國內(nèi)發(fā)展核武器。
對它的主要壓力是東亞內(nèi)部強烈的競爭情緒。如果朝鮮和中國擁有核武器，自然許多韓國人也會覺得他們也應該擁有。反過來，許多中國人覺得他們應該與美國的核武庫競爭。
然而，區(qū)域軍備競賽是一種代價高昂且最終沒有成效的局面。這就是為什么這么多地區(qū)都制定了自己的無核武器區(qū)條約。
無核武器區(qū) - 維基百科（鏈接）

Sameer Dewars Follow
The decision to develop a nuclear arsenal is a complex and highly sensitive matter. While I can provide some general perspectives, it's important to note that official government policies and decisions are subject to change, and my knowledge is based on information available up until September 2021.
South Korea, known as the Republic of Korea, has not pursued the development of its own nuclear arsenal despite being surrounded by three nuclear-armed powers (North Korea, China, and Russia) for several reasons:
1.Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT): South Korea is a signatory to the NPT, an international treaty aimed at preventing the spread of nuclear weapons. As a member of the NPT, South Korea has committed itself to the treaty's principles, including the pursuit of peaceful nuclear energy and disarmament.
2.U.S. Nuclear Umbrella: South Korea has had a security alliance with the United States since the Korean War. Under this alliance, the U.S. provides extended deterrence, which means that in the event of an attack, the U.S. would defend South Korea using its own nuclear capabilities. This arrangement has provided South Korea with a measure of security and has contributed to its decision not to pursue an independent nuclear arsenal.

決定發(fā)展核武庫是一個復雜且高度敏感的問題。雖然我可以提供一些一般性的觀點，但必須注意的是，官方的政府政策和決定可能會發(fā)生變化，我的信息基于截至2021年9月的信息。
韓國，即大韓民國，盡管被三個核武大國（朝鮮、中國和俄羅斯）包圍，但并未發(fā)展自己的核武庫，原因如下：
1.《不擴散核武器條約》：韓國是《不擴散核武器條約》的簽署國，該條約是一項旨在防止核武器擴散的國際條約。作為《不擴散核武器條約》的成員國，韓國致力于遵守該條約的原則，包括追求和平核能和裁軍。
2.美國核保護傘：自朝鮮戰(zhàn)爭以來，韓國一直與美國建立了安全聯(lián)盟。根據(jù)這一聯(lián)盟，美國提供延伸威懾，這意味著一旦韓國遭到攻擊，美國將使用自己的核能力保衛(wèi)韓國。這一安排為韓國提供了一定程度的安全，并促使韓國決定不尋求獨立的核武庫。

3.Regional Stability and Global Non-Proliferation Norms: Pursuing nuclear weapons could have significant implications for regional stability and non-proliferation efforts. South Korea's decision not to develop nuclear weapons aligns with global efforts to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons and maintain stability in Northeast Asia.
4.Economic and Technological Considerations: Developing and maintaining a nuclear arsenal is a costly endeavor. South Korea has instead focused on economic development and technological advancements in other sectors, such as information technology, automotive industry, and other high-tech industries. These sectors have contributed to South Korea's economic growth and global competitiveness.

3.地區(qū)穩(wěn)定和全球不擴散規(guī)范：追求核武器可能對地區(qū)穩(wěn)定和不擴散努力產(chǎn)生重大影響。韓國不發(fā)展核武器的決定符合全球防止核武器擴散和維持東北亞穩(wěn)定的努力。
4.經(jīng)濟和技術考慮：開發(fā)和維護核武庫是一項昂貴的事業(yè)。韓國轉(zhuǎn)而專注于經(jīng)濟發(fā)展和其他領域的技術進步，如信息技術、汽車工業(yè)和其他高科技產(chǎn)業(yè)。這些行業(yè)為韓國的經(jīng)濟增長和全球競爭力做出了貢獻。

It's worth noting that public opinion in South Korea regarding nuclear weapons development has been divided. Some argue that South Korea should have its own nuclear deterrent for self-defense, especially considering the security threats in the region. Others emphasize the importance of maintaining a non-nuclear policy and relying on diplomatic and non-military means to address security concerns.
It's essential to recognize that the security dynamics and geopolitical considerations in the region can evolve over time. South Korea's position on nuclear weapons could be subject to change based on various factors, including shifts in the security environment and the country's assessment of its national security interests.
HOPE YOU LIKED IT AND FOR MORE SUCH CONTENT DON’T FORGET TO FOLLOW AND UPVOTE AND HAVE A GOOD DAY AHEAD

值得注意的是，韓國公眾對核武器發(fā)展的看法存在分歧。一些人認為，韓國應該擁有自己的核威懾力量進行自衛(wèi)，尤其是考慮到該地區(qū)的安全威脅。另一些人則強調(diào)維持無核政策以及依靠外交和非軍事手段解決安全問題的重要性。
必須認識到，該地區(qū)的安全動態(tài)和地緣政治考慮會隨著時間的推移而演變。韓國對核武器的立場可能會因各種因素而發(fā)生變化，包括安全環(huán)境的變化和該國對國家安全利益的評估。
希望你喜歡它，如果想看到更多這樣的內(nèi)容，請不要忘記關注和點贊，祝你有美好的一天

Jiacheng Zhang Follow
Players in East Asia all have nukes, while the puppets don’t. Guess who doesn’t allow the puppets to gain too sharp teeth and claws? The other players, or the player who takes the whip of those puppets?

東亞的玩家都有核彈，而傀儡沒有。猜猜誰不讓傀儡長出太鋒利的牙齒和爪子？其他玩家，還是拿著傀儡鞭子的玩家？

原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://equalizerredsea.com 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處