# Korea can hit us, can we hit Korea? WTF do we do then? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [June 18, 2009, 4:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/korea-can-hit-us-can-we-hit-korea-wtf-do-we-do-then/500188 "2009-06-18T16:10:05Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![user\_hostile](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/user_hostile/32/474_2.png) [@user\_hostile](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/user_hostile)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2009, 10:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/korea-can-hit-us-can-we-hit-korea-wtf-do-we-do-then/500188/81 "2009-06-19T22:41:21Z")
Before DPRK can launch the missile, it needs to miniaturize the warhead. A Fat Man kind of nuke is about 4000 kg which doesn’t allow for much mileage even with the latest in NK missile technology. But to “mini-me” a Fat Man into a reliable weapon you need to test. Not only the missile, but the warhead itself. It’s not simply a matter of mating a nuclear warhead to a missile and launching. Guidance systems, re-entry characteristics, arming mechanisms, spoofing (against ABM) all need to be tested before deployment. And that takes awhile, even if you have the “plans.” Some have speculated that the last detonation was 20k TNT rather than the currently accepted values of about 4k TNT in the West, as a result of decoupling the explosion (which is what the Russians claimed and actually researched this in the 70’s(?)) . Whatever the case, however, doesn’t mean it wouldn’t be a current threat as the missiles could carry lighter biological or chemical weapons instead, which would take less effort to implement. As for the PRC–their number one goal is a stable DPRK. They don’t want a united Korea for several reasons: 1) A government that is more friendly to the west. 2) A loss of investment opportunities (what? You think that NK would prefer PRC over ROK investment? 3) Refugees by the millions? 4) More “Western” influence and finally 5) A potential military threat right next to them. As for the North being crazy? So far DPRK has detonated all of the explosions underground. Why? Why not do the out in the open and show just how crazy they are? Because the prevailing winds would result in fallout drifting over PRC and Japan. Not acceptable to either party. The DPRK knows what it wants: respect and recognition, but it seems to understand the limits of it’s power far better than the US does. Note that ---
**Author:** ![xcalibre](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/x/5daacb/32.png) [@xcalibre](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/xcalibre)\ **Post date:** [June 19, 2009, 10:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/korea-can-hit-us-can-we-hit-korea-wtf-do-we-do-then/500188/82 "2009-06-19T22:47:03Z")
As far as the the crazy nuker goes, they would just put in on a fishing boat and float it into tokyo. From what I understand, this is the widely held nightmare scenario. ---
**Author:** ![Markxxx](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/5daacb/32.png) [@Markxxx](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Markxxx)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2009, 1:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/korea-can-hit-us-can-we-hit-korea-wtf-do-we-do-then/500188/83 "2009-06-20T01:35:47Z")
There are mulitple problems with a North Korean attack on Hawaii. First of all the psychological damage would be awful for the USA. Even the few bombs via balloons that fell on the West Coast during WWII were hushed up, though by war standard these bombs were nothing, they were suppressed as much as possible during WWII. If the bombs were armed with nukes this could usher in a new phase in war where nuclear weapons were acceptable for limited wars. This could mean a mess in places like India -vs- Pakistan. Remember when you look at maps the easiest way for the USA to hit the USSR and vice versa was over the Arctic. In today’s world you don’t need to pose a significant threat to others. You simply need a war of propaganda. Israel lost a war because it tried to fight on the enemy’s terms. There’s only one effective means to beat guerella warfare. That is to contain the enemy and break their will. The British did this during the Beor War a century ago, and used concentration camps to do this. They won, of course the British were universally condemed that was long before WWII. We wouldn’t do this today. North Korea knows this. North Korea simply will blackmail us into giving them food and such. China doesn’t LIKE North Korea any more than we do. But North Korea is a convenient thorn to stick at the USA. The Chinese and South Koreans have no interest in seeing the North colapse 'cause they don’t want the responsiblity of the people. Even if North Korean were to go democratic tomorrow there is a large number of South Koreans that wouldn’t want unification. They saw the cost of German reunification and would prefer to remain seperate or at least to remain seperate till the North has a better economy. There are so many factors at stake you could take any one and run with it and get a totally seperate result, then if you combine factors, it gets that much more complex ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2009, 1:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/korea-can-hit-us-can-we-hit-korea-wtf-do-we-do-then/500188/84 "2009-06-20T01:55:22Z")
Another factor to keep in mind is that the United States is a member of NATO. An attack against us, as was the case in 2001, automatically invokes the treaty obligations of all the other members of the alliance. So if Krazy Kim launched a missile at Hawaai, he would be going to war with the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Germany, and twenty-four other countries. Kim might be willing to fight the United States but is he willing to take on Albania? I don’t think so. ---
**Author:** ![Quintas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/48db29/32.png) [@Quintas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Quintas)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2009, 2:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/korea-can-hit-us-can-we-hit-korea-wtf-do-we-do-then/500188/85 "2009-06-20T02:32:49Z")
> [@Honesty](#): > > Perhaps I’m overly patriotic while European authors sit in their ivory towers writing about the bespectacled boys donning invisibility cloaks and playing football on broomsticks, American scientists are in the [laboratory harnessing invisibility](http://www.dukenews.duke.edu/2006/10/cloakdemo.html). Comparatively, militarily, and technologically, these other nations are in the Stone Age. > > \ > > - Honesty Huh? I can assure you, Europe has scientists every bit as intelligent as the U.S. And what in the world does the fact that an english lady wrote Harry Potter have to do with “Europeans sitting in Ivory Towers writing fantasy novels?” ---
**Author:** ![Quintas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/48db29/32.png) [@Quintas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Quintas)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2009, 2:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/korea-can-hit-us-can-we-hit-korea-wtf-do-we-do-then/500188/86 "2009-06-20T02:55:05Z")
> [@Honesty](#): > > From what I was taught, the U.S is so far advanced that the world hasn’t figured out how we make [these](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stealth_bomber); > > - Honesty The world doesn’t work the way you think it does. The stealth bomber is not ‘magic’. It’s an impressive plane, yes. But it’s more to do with our willingness and ability to spend lots of money on expensive aerospace projects, not the fact that our scientists know some secret other nations don’t. Many _specifics_ about the b-2 are _classified_, but if for some reason the Europeans wanted a bomber with the same capabilities and had the political will to throw money at such a project, they have plenty of world class aerospace engineers to do it. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2009, 3:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/korea-can-hit-us-can-we-hit-korea-wtf-do-we-do-then/500188/87 "2009-06-20T03:01:58Z")
> [@Sage\_Rat](#): > > Yeah, we probably wouldn’t go nuclear. We’d probably take out all of their surface installations with targeted missiles, set South Korea and Japanese forces to securing the streets, and then start up with bunker busters from the sky. Not Japanese forces. The Japanese Ground Self-Defense Force is prohibited by law from operating away from Japanese soil, except under very limited circumstances for UN peacekeeping missions. ---
**Author:** ![billfish678](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@billfish678](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/billfish678)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2009, 3:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/korea-can-hit-us-can-we-hit-korea-wtf-do-we-do-then/500188/88 "2009-06-20T03:03:30Z")
> [@Quintas](#): > > Many _specifics_ about the b-2 are _classified_, but if for some reason the Europeans wanted a bomber with the same capabilities and had the political will to throw money at such a project, they have **plenty** of world class aerospace engineers to do it. Not quite plenty, more like some. Unless the Europeans have a bunch of world class engineers sitting in a waiting room until they are needed. ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2009, 3:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/korea-can-hit-us-can-we-hit-korea-wtf-do-we-do-then/500188/89 "2009-06-20T03:40:58Z")
> [@billfish678](#): > > Not quite plenty, more like some. Unless the Europeans have a bunch of world class engineers sitting in a waiting room until they are needed. Do you seriously think Europe is short of talented scientists and engineers? Are you kidding around here? ---
**Author:** ![Notassmartasithought](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/c0e974/32.png) [@Notassmartasithought](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Notassmartasithought)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2009, 6:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/korea-can-hit-us-can-we-hit-korea-wtf-do-we-do-then/500188/90 "2009-06-20T06:04:28Z")
> [@xcalibre](#): > > You assume in a crisis situation only conventional weapons would get used. I’m not so convinced. **xcalibre** , I think you’re wrong. But first I want to say that you and I probably have the same feelings about many US adventures in foreign affairs. But I guess we don’t have the same view of our political leaders and their staffs, or of the American electorate. I think that there are few serious policy analysts who would say that if we get hit by a North Korean nuke, we must nuke in return. Especially after Iraq and Afghanistan, where the obvious first lesson is that over zealous military action is a hinderance, not a help. In a situation where a conventional force can do the same job much more humanely it would be immoral to nuke North Korea. Say NK hits Honolulu or Fairbanks with a Nuke. Or New York or Chicago. You are advised that we can take out all of NK’s, anti-air, missile launch sites, air bases, and major military logistic centers with our air assets. So there is no additional nuclear threat. In addition, we can nuke Pyongyang (or any other NK city). Do you really think the US would launch a nuclear attack? Or should? At the end of the day, in world history, the tally would be: Use of Nuclear Weapons: North Korea 1 USA 3 (or more) Do you think that’s a statistic we want to have hanging on us? Earlier in the thread I’ve offered the notion that we can gain air superiority fairly quickly (especially because even now, the one service not over extended in Iraq/Afghanistan is the Air Force) and once that occurs, the ground situation will be at least stabalized, and most likely with most of NK rural areas in our control. The threat of precise attacks on the NK leadership after ground stabalization, along with what I call an “humanitarian” seige is the next step. ---
**Author:** ![Quartz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quartz/32/267_2.png) [@Quartz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Quartz)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2009, 7:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/korea-can-hit-us-can-we-hit-korea-wtf-do-we-do-then/500188/91 "2009-06-20T07:27:07Z")
> [@Notassmartasithought](#): > > Say NK hits Honolulu or Fairbanks with a Nuke. Or New York or Chicago. You are advised that we can take out all of NK’s, anti-air, missile launch sites, air bases, and major military logistic centers with our air assets. So there is no additional nuclear threat. In addition, we can nuke Pyongyang (or any other NK city). You fire said advisor for being a blithering idiot. How do you know that NK doesn’t have another nuke ready to launch? Further, such a conventional strike would leave a lot of troops on the NK/SK border intact resulting in the deaths of a lot of SK civilians when NK attacks. No, you’ve got to take them all out very quickly. ---
**Author:** ![Declan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ecae2f/32.png) [@Declan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Declan)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2009, 7:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/korea-can-hit-us-can-we-hit-korea-wtf-do-we-do-then/500188/92 "2009-06-20T07:29:16Z")
> [@Notassmartasithought](#): > > I think that there are few serious policy analysts who would say that if we get hit by a North Korean nuke, we must nuke in return. Especially after Iraq and Afghanistan, where the obvious first lesson is that over zealous military action is a hinderance, not a help. In a situation where a conventional force can do the same job much more humanely it would be immoral to nuke North Korea. Actually it would be a political response, policy analysts can say what they want, or what the admin wants to hear, but a president thrown into that kind of maelstrom has something in the constitution that says defend the US from enemies foriegn and domestic, should someone detonate a nuke on american soil, and kill quite a few americans, I would be very surprised if a parity response was not initated. > [@Notassmartasithought](#): > > Do you really think the US would launch a nuclear attack?Or should ? Regarding Obamas statement regarding apropriate level of response, in contrast to Hillarys let the rubble bounce response, I dont have the same amount of confidence that he would respond with nukes that every other admin other than the carter adminstration, would have. Should they , yes Declan ---
**Author:** ![Declan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ecae2f/32.png) [@Declan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Declan)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2009, 7:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/korea-can-hit-us-can-we-hit-korea-wtf-do-we-do-then/500188/93 "2009-06-20T07:31:05Z")
> [@FoieGrasIsEvil](#): > > I realized shortly thereafter that you were referring to “baby boomer”.: Thats an improved LA class sub, lol Declan ---
**Author:** ![Monty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/monty/32/47_2.png) [@Monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monty)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2009, 9:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/korea-can-hit-us-can-we-hit-korea-wtf-do-we-do-then/500188/94 "2009-06-20T09:43:16Z")
> [@user\_hostile](#): > > As for the PRC–their number one goal is a stable DPRK. They don’t want a united Korea for several reasons: 1) A government that is more friendly to the west. 2) A loss of investment opportunities (what? You think that NK would prefer PRC over ROK investment? 3) Refugees by the millions? 4) More “Western” influence and finally 5) A potential military threat right next to them. Where did you pull all of that from? Everything I’ve seen and heard indicates that the reason the PRC tries to get along with the DPRK is to keep the latter outfit in check and not screw up peace in the region. The PRC is doing quite fine trading with both the US and the ROK. And there are quite a few ROK outfits investing in the ROK. Any war between the two Koreas would end with a victory for the ROK. And only an insane person would consider the ROK a potential military threat to the massive PRC. ---
**Author:** ![Monty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/monty/32/47_2.png) [@Monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monty)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2009, 9:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/korea-can-hit-us-can-we-hit-korea-wtf-do-we-do-then/500188/95 "2009-06-20T09:46:27Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > Not Japanese forces. The Japanese Ground Self-Defense Force is prohibited by law from operating away from Japanese soil, except under very limited circumstances for UN peacekeeping missions. I seem to recall a sound bite in the Japanese news not so long ago where a senior Japanese administration official (can’t remember if it was the PM or a cabinet level official) stated that a convincing case could be made for a strike on foreign soil being constitutionally permissible for self-defense. ---
**Author:** ![Bosda\_Di\_Chi\_of\_Tricor](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bosda_di_chi_of_tricor/32/16845_2.png) [@Bosda\_Di\_Chi\_of\_Tricor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bosda_Di_Chi_of_Tricor)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2009, 10:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/korea-can-hit-us-can-we-hit-korea-wtf-do-we-do-then/500188/96 "2009-06-20T10:49:15Z")
> [@](#): > > Korea can hit us, can we hit Korea? WTF do we do then? If we _really_ want to, we can hire that gorilla from the luggage ads on tv to jump up & donwn on his face. Kudos to the Doper who knows the fictional character who said that. ---
**Author:** ![billfish678](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7bcc69/32.png) [@billfish678](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/billfish678)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2009, 11:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/korea-can-hit-us-can-we-hit-korea-wtf-do-we-do-then/500188/97 "2009-06-20T11:45:37Z")
> [@RickJay](#): > > Do you seriously think Europe is short of talented scientists and engineers? Are you kidding around here? No, but they are working on other stuff. And we have others working on other stuff as well. Hence my plenty vs some comment. And for the record, I think our old “arch enemy” the USSR, has/had some of the brightest and most creative, so its not like I am rabidly pro American. but we seriously fund and operate our military/aerospace/space exploration/industrial complex. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2009, 12:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/korea-can-hit-us-can-we-hit-korea-wtf-do-we-do-then/500188/98 "2009-06-20T12:07:55Z")
> [@Notassmartasithought](#): > > At the end of the day, in world history, the tally would be: > > Use of Nuclear Weapons: North Korea 1 > USA 3 (or more) So far, the world history tally is Use of Atomic Weapons USA 2 Everyone Else 0 And we have been able to live with that. An all-out nuclear exchange with the USSR meant hundreds of missiles going off. An all-out nuclear exchange with North Korea means somewhere around one or two from them, and as many as necessary from the US to remove the threat. The only limiting factor - the _only_ one - is considerations of damage to South Korea and China. Actual use of a North Korean nuke would be the equivalent of a suicide note, and everybody knows it. If our intelligence suggests that nuclear strikes are the best way to take out any additional launch capability, then that is what will happen. If conventional missiles and Stealth bombers and B-52 raids twice an hour until everything north of the 38th parallel is pocked with bloody craters, then that is what will happen. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![cckerberos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f0a364/32.png) [@cckerberos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cckerberos)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2009, 12:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/korea-can-hit-us-can-we-hit-korea-wtf-do-we-do-then/500188/99 "2009-06-20T12:14:15Z")
> [@Monty](#): > > I seem to recall a sound bite in the Japanese news not so long ago where a senior Japanese administration official (can’t remember if it was the PM or a cabinet level official) stated that a convincing case could be made for a strike on foreign soil being constitutionally permissible for self-defense. You might be thinking of [the recent recommendation by the LDP’s defense policy panel that the government gain the capability to strike missile sites abroad.](http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/nn20090610a7.html) More generally speaking, the official Japanese government’s position (from [the most recent MOD White Paper (PDF)](http://www.mod.go.jp/e/publ/w_paper/pdf/2008/19Part2_Chapter1_Sec2.pdf)) is that " > [@](#): > > The use of minimum necessary force to defend Japan under the right of self-defense is not necessarily confined to the geographic boundaries of Japanese territory, territorial waters and airspace… > Nevertheless, the Government interprets that the Constitution does not permit armed troops to be dispatched to the land, sea, or airspace of other countries with the aim of using force; So as things stand now, the government says that ground troops are out (but only ground troops). However, what Article 9 does or does not allow is primarily a political question in Japan rather than a legal one, with governments changing their interpretation of the Article to suit their purposes. If the people are willing to go along with an interpretation, I think the government can largely do as it likes. And given the paranoia and fear with which the Japanese public regards North Korea, I think that if the shooting starts the government will be more or less given a blank check to do whatever is necessary “to defend Japan.” (Though I can’t imagine a Japanese government ever choosing to dispatch ground troops to the Korean peninsula. That’s a terrible idea on any number of levels.) ---
**Author:** ![cckerberos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f0a364/32.png) [@cckerberos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cckerberos)\ **Post date:** [June 20, 2009, 12:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/korea-can-hit-us-can-we-hit-korea-wtf-do-we-do-then/500188/100 "2009-06-20T12:34:10Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > The only limiting factor - the _only_ one - is considerations of damage to South Korea and China. I can think of another consideration that we would do well to keep in mind, namely the popular reaction within South Korea. Policymakers are somewhat concerned about making sure that Korea stays within the US camp (as opposed to cozying up to China) in the future as is, and we have a vested interest in how the post-Korean unification NE Asian order works out. Needlessly antagonizing an ally (by, say, irradiating much of what they consider to be their homeland) is something that should be avoided if possible. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/korea-can-hit-us-can-we-hit-korea-wtf-do-we-do-then/500188.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/korea-can-hit-us-can-we-hit-korea-wtf-do-we-do-then/500188.md?page=6)