Nuclear technology is old at this point. Any country with even a modest infrastructure can eventually get the ability to have these weapons. Just like how gun powder traveled so will this. Should we invade every country we dont like because they get nukes? If so why are we not be invading Russia who stole the tech from us? In the end we either have to live with it or take eventually take over most of the world.
Nothing. Let them have their fireworks, they are no threat to anybody. However, if they harm somebody, then declare war.
I dont know that I would consider them a threat to no one. I am not entirely convinced about their threat to America though.
Nothing.Absolutely nothing.Anything others is crazy and could be WWIII Let commies alone and forget them.
That's up to America, if you left it would inspire the South to take responsibility for their own defense... they're hardly poor and struggling. I think you'd miss the base though
The problem is they will harm somebody, either us or S. Korea. They will most definitely use the nukes when they perfect a reliable delivery system.
We need China to deal with the issue and if they won't then we cut China and Russia off trade wise. They would never actually risk that so then China would %100 cut off NK and then in a few months he would beg for a deal. A fully nuclear North Korea is too much of a risk to just let happen without at lest trying to every last non act of war action that can be done.
To my mind, for NK to possess nuclear tipped ICBMs is out of the question. That must never happen. The US should not accept living under the nuclear shadow of NK. Every possible peaceable means should be used to end NK's nuclear weapons program. China is the key to that. If that fails then we are left with no choice but to use a military option.
Do you have a plan to prevent the millions of artillery deaths in Seoul that are the real problem with this plan and have been for decades? Or just let those South Koreans die?
My plan would be to be as patient as we possibly could. If I were the POTUS, I would do everything in my power to get China to act. I would use every tool at our disposal - persuasion, negotiation, or even economic punitive measures all the way up to a cutoff of trade - to get them to act. What I want is for China to act like a responsible world power and - through any means necessary - end NK's nuclear program. I believe that there is no peaceable resolution to this problem without China taking action. It is just not possible. China is the key. China may cut off trade with NK which is NK's lifeblood. Or, as far as I'm concerned, China may use its own military means to end NK's nuclear program, including invasion and forced regime change. I would assure China that I do not wish to use our military. I do not covet one square inch of NK territory. Furthermore, I do not seek to remove NK from China's sphere of influence. I would tell them, however, that NK may not possess nuclear tipped ICBMs that can reach the US, including Hawaii or Alaska. That is out of the question and not negotiable. Out. of. the. question. And I would tell the Chinese that if they fail to act, a time will come in the near future when we will act. And I would tell them - straight up - what would happen. Initially, we would attack NK's nuclear facilities - all of them - using conventional means. And I would tell the Chinese that a massive devastation of Seoul was also out of the question. And if NK attempted to devastate Seoul with their artillery in retaliation, I would wage a one-hour war against NK to stop them. A one-hour war using all of our power. Capiche? And I would ask the Chinese if this is what they really want because this is what's going to happen if they don't act. Seth
Is South Korea doing to be in China's sphere of influence? I highly doubt it. Therefore North Korea's destruction is opposed to Chinese strategic goals, within reason. They want a stable North Korea which holds the line, not the erratic regime currently in charge. Hence why they are pissed off at them. That doesn't mean they want a US-allied South Korea to dominate Korea. It means they want a stable regime. What exactly does "out of the question" mean to you? In international relations such statements can usually be boiled down to "do/don't do x otherwise y". So what is your y? No need for rhetoric here, I just want to find out where you stand. North Korea is not a puppet state of China. Therefore, what you're proposing is some threat against China unless they enact some successful threat against North Korea to stop them obtaining ICBM nuclear weapons capability or retaliating when you invade and bomb their country on a massive scale. These are demands which China does not have the capability to extract from NK. This is a large reason for the North Korea question being so difficult: soft power doesn't work against them because they are largely autarkic. They are purposefully self-sufficient. Of course, they're in perpetual famine, but they don't care about their population so it's difficult to leverage this against them. I suppose you could blanket the country with nuclear weapons in a first strike, but not even the most radical thinkers propose this. Do you? This throws out any pretense of acting to help neighbouring countries. China, South Korea, North Korea, one thing they all agree on is that they want Korea to remain livable. There's no point in any of this if the peninsula is destroyed. That would be a rather dangerous moment, nuclear weapons launching from the US and flying close to Russia and China before hitting a Chinese ally. Death wish sort of thing. You are overestimating the degree to which NK is under Chinese control. If China cuts off NK, NK will abandon China. The regime doesn't care if half their population dies in the resulting famine. They are willing to take almost any penalty to their regime surviving.
Limited military strike *with proviso* Knock out their nuclear capabilities, their artillery, and their leadership with our space based kinetics that 'dont exist.' Of course, then we'll have to own up to the fact that while not technically breaching the 'no space nukes' treaty we have with the other nuclear powers, we have been hiding something nearly as effective up there. But its not like many of them dont have em too. NK is a legitimate nuclear threat, a 'clear and present danger' to the entire planet, and worth the expose of our space kinetics. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinetic_bombardment
It means that the US will not acquiesce, not accept it. And it means the US will do something to stop it. It means that it's non-negotiable. It means that we will resort to any length, if we must, to prevent it. I don't know how to explain it better than that. I would certainly tell China that the US has no reason to seek war with China. We have no desire at all to threaten China. If we are forced to act, our actions shall not be taken against China. Furthermore, as I said before, I would tell the Chinese in total sincerity that the US does not wish to change the political landscape of the two Koreas. We shall not put boots on the ground. We will not occupy. We will not unify the two Koreas. My vision would be a South Korea that is what it is now, and a North Korea that remains a communist nation aligned with China. I do not wish to change the status quo. The only thing I wish to change is the nuclear threat that NK poses to my country and its neighbors. Nothing else. I would not seek to "blanket the country" with nukes. If NK launched a potentially devastating attack on SK, the amount of damage it could do in a very short time would be very similar to just dropping a nuke on Seoul. This type of attack would have to be stopped as fast as humanly possible, and there is only one way to do that. The response I envision would be as limited as possible, and, if possible, to primarily military targets. However, I would be prepared to continue that attack if NK did not relent. You may recall that after the first nuke was dropped on Japan, Japan refused to surrender. They surrendered after the second one. I would see to it that the Russians and Chinese knew exactly what we were going to do and why. If it came to that, they would get forewarning. My understanding is that China supplies NK with more than simply food. They also supply them with fuel. I also believe that NK needs China much more than China needs NK. Furthermore - and you make an interesting point - NK does want its regime to survive. Little Kim wants his regime to survive. It will survive if he ends the nuclear program. It will not survive if he doesn't. Don't think for a minute that I relish any of this. We have a choice. We may live under the nuclear shadow of NK and little Kim, or we may not. I believe we must not. But if we choose that we shall not, then our viable, logical options are limited. If we finally attack NK's nuclear assets, and NK retaliates by try to explode Seoul and more, then the option I'm suggesting is logical. The intent would be to end NK's attack quickly. It surely would take life, but it would also save life. A protracted conventional war would be absolutely devastating to both countries in terms of casualties and damage... utterly devastating. I just fail to see the logic in engaging in that kind of war when we could end it quickly instead. We all have an aversion to the use of nuclear weapons. But when one considers the awful alternative, it is logical, and in a strange way, more humane. It was similar with Japan in WW2. The explosions were terrible for the people on the ground who were hit. But, in the big picture, we know that Japan's subsequent surrender saved millions more. Millions of Japanese and Americans lived and went on with life who would have otherwise died if not for the loss of life in and devastation of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. And finally, this is not our fault. As good and decent people, we have a conscience. We feel guilt when we're wrong. We do not want this! But we are not driving this. This crisis is being driven by little Kim, the little nutcase. The US, South Korea, and everyone else is perfectly happy and content to let the little mutant alone to rule over his little communist paradise. He doesn't need nukes because nobody wants to restart the war, and his security is guaranteed by China and, to some lesser degree, by Russia. This whole problem is unnecessary, and he, and he alone, is driving it forward to the crisis point. And so, if we are forced to take action, I will not share in the handwringing and guilt. We have a right to protect ourselves and our allies, and god knows we have tried - for decades, actually - to avoid this outcome. Seth
Why? We lived under the Nuclear shadow of the Soviet Union for several decades and they were always much, MUCH stronger than North Korea is now or will almost certainly ever be. Their missiles could actually hit targets they were aimed at and they were actually stronger and more reliable than most of ours.
