# Go on the offensive \[against North Korea\]... agree or disagree and why? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [January 24, 2013, 5:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/go-on-the-offensive-against-north-korea-agree-or-disagree-and-why/648236 "2013-01-24T17:47:15Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![solosam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9d8465/32.png) [@solosam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/solosam)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2013, 4:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/go-on-the-offensive-against-north-korea-agree-or-disagree-and-why/648236/101 "2013-02-12T16:07:18Z")
> [@](#): > > Go on the offensive [against North Korea]… agree or disagree and why? Absolutely not. War on the Korean peninsula would be a disaster for all involved. Further, the North has repeatedly demonstrated that despite its empty rhetoric and occasional outbursts of violence, it will not begin a war. They only rattle their sabers and conduct nuclear tests when they want to extort some kind of concessions out of the US and the South. Just because they detonated a nuclear device does not mean they have the ability to successfully deploy it as an offensive munition. More important of all, there is little to no will among the nation or the international community to take offensive action against rogue nuclear states like Iran, North Korea, or Pakistan. The tragic fact of the matter is that we must wait until one of these nations detonates a nuclear weapon offensively (either on their own or through proxies) before people will take the danger seriously and look to a military solution. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2013, 4:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/go-on-the-offensive-against-north-korea-agree-or-disagree-and-why/648236/102 "2013-02-12T16:45:49Z")
> [@solosam](#): > > Absolutely not. War on the Korean peninsula would be a disaster for all involved. > > \ > > . . . The tragic fact of the matter is that we must wait until one of these nations detonates a nuclear weapon offensively (either on their own or through proxies) before people will take the danger seriously and look to a military solution. **Not** so tragic, then. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2013, 4:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/go-on-the-offensive-against-north-korea-agree-or-disagree-and-why/648236/103 "2013-02-12T16:47:00Z")
> [@Monty](#): > > **drew** : You might want to remember that the reason North Korea gets away with what they do is because China will react militarily if any country attacks–even in response–North Korea. Will they, really? Or do they regard NK as an embarrassment? ---
**Author:** ![Patty\_O\_Furniture](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/96bed5/32.png) [@Patty\_O\_Furniture](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Patty_O_Furniture)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2013, 4:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/go-on-the-offensive-against-north-korea-agree-or-disagree-and-why/648236/104 "2013-02-12T16:50:41Z")
> [@solosam](#): > > Further, the North has repeatedly demonstrated that despite its empty rhetoric and occasional outbursts of violence, it will not begin a war. It doesn’t just have to be about all-out war. What if they start using nuclear devices (or the technology, parts, etc.) as a commodity to be sold to other countries or terrorist factions, in exchange for the food they’re not getting because of sanctions? ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2013, 4:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/go-on-the-offensive-against-north-korea-agree-or-disagree-and-why/648236/105 "2013-02-12T16:52:58Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Will they, really? Or do they regard NK as an embarrassment? They regard NK as a significant problem, if anything destabilizes the government. China fears 20 million starving refugees flooding over the border if the government falls. It is in China’s interest to maintain the status quo. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2013, 4:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/go-on-the-offensive-against-north-korea-agree-or-disagree-and-why/648236/106 "2013-02-12T16:57:32Z")
> [@Patty\_O\_Furniture](#): > > It doesn’t just have to be about all-out war. What if they start using nuclear devices (or the technology, parts, etc.) as a commodity to be sold to other countries or terrorist factions, in exchange for the food they’re not getting because of sanctions? [Already happened.](http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/northkorea/8129670/North-Korea-runs-international-nuclear-smuggling-network.html) This is why people take nuclear proliferation so seriously. ---
**Author:** ![Shiloh2013](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e79b87/32.png) [@Shiloh2013](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shiloh2013)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2013, 5:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/go-on-the-offensive-against-north-korea-agree-or-disagree-and-why/648236/107 "2013-02-12T17:01:14Z")
NK is China’s problem. If China wants to be seen as a pillar of Asian security, they have to step up and deal with NK. If they don’t no-one will, certainly not this admin. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2013, 5:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/go-on-the-offensive-against-north-korea-agree-or-disagree-and-why/648236/108 "2013-02-12T17:14:13Z")
> [@Shiloh2013](#): > > NK is China’s problem. That’ll be news to the South Koreans. ---
**Author:** ![solosam](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9d8465/32.png) [@solosam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/solosam)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2013, 5:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/go-on-the-offensive-against-north-korea-agree-or-disagree-and-why/648236/109 "2013-02-12T17:15:15Z")
> [@](#): > > Do you think they are just bluffing about reunification as well? Do you see everything they do as rational? Of course they are. Reunification is the giant carrot that drives people on both sides of the DMZ. Koreans want reunification in an idealistic abstract sense. Actually implementing it would be a nightmare, but there are many people who desperately want to be reunited with their families, so they still cling to it. The national goal of reunification with the South is the great fiction that the North uses to perpetuate its regime. They claim that they want to peacefully reunify with the South and rescue their long-lost cousins. All the hardship and suffering of the North Korean people serves the ultimate goal of an eventual reunification and the opposition to the US boogeyman that keeps them apart. This is a farce. Without a noble cause to work towards and an external enemy to oppose, they would have no way to justify their misappropriation of resources and human rights atrocities. Maintaining the fiction is what has kept them in power for so long. Reunification is the worst thing that could possibly happen to the Kim Dynasty. ---
**Author:** ![YogSothoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/8edcca/32.png) [@YogSothoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YogSothoth)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2013, 5:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/go-on-the-offensive-against-north-korea-agree-or-disagree-and-why/648236/110 "2013-02-12T17:18:08Z")
Disagree. Really, what changed between today and a week ago? They still have the bomb, and if we didn’t invade them then, we shouldn’t do it now. Sure, testing nukes brings one a bit closer to having a working and operational arsenal, but its doubtful North Korea is suicidal enough to use one. North Korea doesn’t want a nuke for offense, its for defense only ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2013, 5:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/go-on-the-offensive-against-north-korea-agree-or-disagree-and-why/648236/111 "2013-02-12T17:39:28Z")
> [@YogSosoth](#): > > Really, what changed between today and a week ago? They tested a nuclear weapon for the first time in three or four years and appear to have a smaller and more powerful bomb, which is what you need if to do if you want to put the bomb on a missile as discussed earlier. So there’s that. > [@](#): > > Sure, testing nukes brings one a bit closer to having a working and operational arsenal Right. That would be bad. > [@](#): > > its doubtful North Korea is suicidal enough to use one. > [@](#): > > North Korea doesn’t want a nuke for offense, its for defense only “Doubtful?” How comforting. A nuke is a nuke, and we can only speculate about how it would be used. “Doubtful” isn’t not much comfort to anybody. While I share your doubts, continued testing props up the regime and a bigger arsenal is more dangerous for everybody because they could try to use it, could go back to selling the technology, and because who knows what will happen to the weapons when this dynasty collapses. ---
**Author:** ![Undertone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/d26b3c/32.png) [@Undertone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Undertone)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2013, 7:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/go-on-the-offensive-against-north-korea-agree-or-disagree-and-why/648236/112 "2013-02-12T19:30:18Z")
> [@chargerrich](#): > > From CNN [cite](http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/23/world/asia/north-korea-nuclear-test/index.html?hpt=hp_t1) > > North Korea said Thursday that it plans to carry out a new nuclear test and more long-range rocket launches, all of which it said are a part of a new phase of confrontation with the United States. > > The North’s National Defense Commission said the moves would feed into an **“upcoming all-out action” that would target the United States, “the sworn enemy of the Korean people.”** > > I understand our nation is war weary and political pressure and lack of political capital are working against any action but if North Korea are sworn to hate us and are clearly threatening nuclear action, what is stopping us from a preemptive strike? > > I know nuclear action is not on the table, but what about air strikes on war-industry targets? > > To my way of thinking this is clearly a more sensible use of our military forces than the ongoing middle east saga. > > **Does anyone think if they ever have the capability that they WONT launch an attack on U.S. soil immediately?** MAD is why they won’t. Mutual Assured Destruction. This underpinned the Soviet/NATO opposition. If one fired the other would reply with everything available. Total annihilation. NK has at best a few weapons, certainly nothing able to destroy the western world. Just France or the UK has enough capability to wipe NK from the planet for a thousand years, let alone the US retaliation. They have nothing to gain and everything to lose. They gob off a bit but are not so stupid so as to really press the button, like India or Pakistan, they cannot prevent a retaliatory strike which would be total. You worry too much and should go and have a beer or two. ---
**Author:** ![Undertone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/d26b3c/32.png) [@Undertone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Undertone)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2013, 7:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/go-on-the-offensive-against-north-korea-agree-or-disagree-and-why/648236/113 "2013-02-12T19:44:28Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > [Already happened.](http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/northkorea/8129670/North-Korea-runs-international-nuclear-smuggling-network.html) This is why people take nuclear proliferation so seriously. A few guys in a jet killed about 3,000 people in 2001. Look at the fall out of that! Do you really think the result of a nuke would be less than a total wipe out of any even imagined threat globally? You can sit at home being scared but if it is taken to the next level the response will be up there too, relax, have a beer. The bogey man is not at the door. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2013, 7:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/go-on-the-offensive-against-north-korea-agree-or-disagree-and-why/648236/114 "2013-02-12T19:45:55Z")
> [@Undertone](#): > > You can sit at home being scared Consider reading the whole thread. ---
**Author:** ![Undertone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/d26b3c/32.png) [@Undertone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Undertone)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2013, 7:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/go-on-the-offensive-against-north-korea-agree-or-disagree-and-why/648236/115 "2013-02-12T19:49:48Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > Consider reading the whole thread. I did, and it still makes no sense. None of these countries you fear can possibly win. Sure there would be some losses but you seem to think these problems have never faced the world before. Been there, seen it, done it. You read a history book or two then relax and have a beer, really you worry too much. ---
**Author:** ![Patty\_O\_Furniture](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/96bed5/32.png) [@Patty\_O\_Furniture](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Patty_O_Furniture)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2013, 7:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/go-on-the-offensive-against-north-korea-agree-or-disagree-and-why/648236/116 "2013-02-12T19:52:02Z")
Ah yes, deterrence. The theory that you can prevent two dogs from fighting by giving them both longer, sharper teeth. ---
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2013, 8:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/go-on-the-offensive-against-north-korea-agree-or-disagree-and-why/648236/117 "2013-02-12T20:01:49Z")
> [@Undertone](#): > > I did I don’t know how you could have read the thread and missed all the posts where I said I didn’t think North Korea was going to attack anybody because they wouldn’t survive, which is the same reason you just gave. Another poster asked about the possibility of North Korea selling their weapons technology, and I pointed out that that’s already happened. I’m not sure what that has to do with September 11th. Putting all that aside, unless you’re posting in the BBQ Pit, you probably shouldn’t tell posters they sound scared and need to relax. ---
**Author:** ![Undertone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/d26b3c/32.png) [@Undertone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Undertone)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2013, 8:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/go-on-the-offensive-against-north-korea-agree-or-disagree-and-why/648236/118 "2013-02-12T20:07:30Z")
> [@Patty\_O\_Furniture](#): > > Ah yes, deterrence. The theory that you can prevent two dogs from fighting by giving them both longer, sharper teeth. I get your scepticism, but it works. If your gain is far out-weighed by your loss, you will think again. Punch me and you get shot to death for sure, and you will think again. Even if you are too stupid to see it you get shot anyway. The world lived through these things many times since 1945, and we got past it. Unless you can possibly win out right, as per the USSR in the 70s or 80s, you lose. NK cannot possibly win, so why worry? ---
**Author:** ![Snarky\_Kong](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a183cd/32.png) [@Snarky\_Kong](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snarky_Kong)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2013, 8:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/go-on-the-offensive-against-north-korea-agree-or-disagree-and-why/648236/119 "2013-02-12T20:09:18Z")
> [@Patty\_O\_Furniture](#): > > Ah yes, deterrence. The theory that you can prevent two dogs from fighting by giving them both longer, sharper teeth. Care to give your theory on why violent death due to war has significantly decreased since the invention of nuclear weapons? ---
**Author:** ![Undertone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/d26b3c/32.png) [@Undertone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Undertone)\ **Post date:** [February 12, 2013, 8:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/go-on-the-offensive-against-north-korea-agree-or-disagree-and-why/648236/120 "2013-02-12T20:11:38Z")
> [@Marley23](#): > > I don’t know how you could have read the thread and missed all the posts where I said I didn’t think North Korea was going to attack anybody because they wouldn’t survive, which is the same reason you just gave. Another poster asked about the possibility of North Korea selling their weapons technology, and I pointed out that that’s already happened. I’m not sure what that has to do with September 11th. > > Putting all that aside, unless you’re posting in the BBQ Pit, you probably shouldn’t tell posters they sound scared and need to relax. Sorry Marley, I must have missed that. Just not worrying about the scare mongers. No insult intended. September 11 2001 was just pointing out a relatively small loss compared to a nuke elicited a huge response, something bigger would be catastrophic for the belligerent. Apologies if I missunderstood, it was not my intention. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/go-on-the-offensive-against-north-korea-agree-or-disagree-and-why/648236.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/go-on-the-offensive-against-north-korea-agree-or-disagree-and-why/648236.md?page=7)