Nuclear NK

Why are we sitting around letting NK get the capability of launching nukes to the US? I keep hearing how horrible it would be to have them launching attacks into SK, but won’t it be 10x worse when they are nuclear attacks on the US instead? Why not attack them before they get the capability to nuke us?

How many millions of people’s lives are you willing to risk?

The South Koreans are the ones right on the border of North Korea, maybe we should ask them.

So what branch of the service is the OP a member of?

So the answer is to wait until the entire world is at risk? That seems rather short sighted… How many millions were at risk in WWII? It seems like it is generally regarded as a just war against evil. Is that not the case with NK? If not, why not? At what point does the international community stop wagging their fingers and saying “naughty, naughty”, and actually do something? I’m scared that my children will grow up with the world a nuclear wasteland. What long term game are we playing?

Have you considered that this might be slightly more nuanced and complex issue than just “doing something” or “attacking”?

ishamael69, I think that what you may not be considering is that, while a North Korea capable of carrying out a nuclear strike against the U.S. might do so at some future time, if we start bombing North Korea they almost certainly will immediately start bombarding South Korea and perhaps Japan as well, potentially killing millions and devastating the global economy. (I mention the economy to make the point that this is really bad for America even if we were to selfishly disregard the lives of our South Korean and Japanese allies, and our own citizens and servicemen stationed abroad.)

Also, there’s a strong incentive for Kim Jong-Un not to initiate a nuclear first strike against the U.S., since it would guarantee a devastating American counterstrike.

Having to live with the possibility that North Korea could decide at any time to nuke the U.S. is awful, and I’m not trying to minimize it, but are we really willing to guarantee a horrible outcome today to remove the possibility of a horrible outcome which might never happen?

But keep in mind the United States didn’t join the fighting in World War II until we were attacked by Japan. Even the European powers didn’t get involved until Hitler started invading other countries. In contrast, Kim Jong-Un hasn’t actually attacked anyone yet, and he might never actually do so.

Now, you might say it would have been better to invade Germany as soon as Hitler seized power – but you’re saying that with the knowledge, in hindsight, that he was about to start a world war. How many more world wars would we have caused if “invade to prevent future aggression” was our policy? Certainly we could have started a horrible one against the U.S.S.R., had we chosen to go that route.

Must one be a service-member to have an opinion?

(Nuclear war threatens us all, civilian and military alike. Also, opinions are like armpits… We all have a couple…)

Because China is enabling them. NK would fall in weeks but China is protecting them and nobody wants to get into a war with them.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

“Because China is enabling them.”

Ah, that makes some sense and changes the equation, I guess. I thought China had pretty much washed their hands when NK kept building more after China tried to simmer them down. What would it take for China to decide enough is enough? A threat directed at them?

“Fall?” Who has shown any indication of invading them?

Belgium would “fall in weeks” if France, England, and Germany decided to attack them…but that’s just about equally likely.

Well, Ishamael69 for one. :smiley:

Here are all the recent nuclear North Korea threads I’m aware of, arranged newest to oldest. The OP should read all 20 or 30 pages of them then get back to us with any new ideas or concerns.

China absolutely does not want a unified Korea with South Korea assimilating the north. This also brings the US right up to their borders. Not what they want.

When thinking of both China and Russia understand they like to have border states to keep their potential enemies miles away from their homeland. the result of several different invasions of each in the past. Long memories they have.

We in the USA don’t really appreciate the geo-political concept of potential enemies close to our borders. 3,000 miles of oceans on the east and west and peaceful neighbors to the north and south. If I recall correctly the last US soil invasion was Pancho Villa at Columbus, New Mexico. Does not quite compare to the Mongols, or Napoleon, or Japan, nor Hitler per the experiences of China and Russia.

North Korea is a hostage situation. They can cause a lot of property damage and physical harm to South Korea and Japan so nobody does anything. However the longer we wait the more damage they can inflict.

It is like if someone takes ten hostages with a pistol, and they demand an extra five hostages and a machine gun. Then they demand twenty hostages and grenades. That is the situation.

The problem is North Korea is a major proliferator of wmd. If North Korea has nukes, they will sell them or at least sell the technology. They have already sold nuclear technology to Syria, Iran, Myanmar, Libya, etc. To help them build nukes.

Also North Korea sells chemical weapons to Syria.

Imo that is the real risk of North Korea. Not them nuking the US, it is more the risk of them selling wmd to anyone willing to write checks, and then those nations using them. North Korea could become a major proliferator of nuclear weapons and who knows how they will end up being used.