North Korea. Please explain.

amother

Green

Tue, Jul 04 2017, 9:21 pm

So I'm reading that in response to North Korea shooting a ballistic missile, the United States and South Korea performed a joint military drill in an attempt to show North Korea just how strong and powerful we are and for N. Korea to realize it's not a good idea to mess with us. My question is that the main reason why the U.S. doesn't obliterate N.K. is because we are worried that even though we can topple the N.K. regime in 30 minutes, the problem is the the N.K. leader is so crazy that while he is being defeated, he will shoot missiles into bordering South Korea potentially killing millions of people in minutes. N.K. knows this is the reason we are not going in and fighting them. How does demonstrating our might change anything. Please explain.

PinkFridge

Tue, Jul 04 2017, 9:53 pm

amother wrote:

Good question. I'm trying to remember who I heard suggest that the best thing we can do is sanctions because there is no military option.

marina

Tue, Jul 04 2017, 10:00 pm

amother wrote:

You're asking why we don't obliterate 25 million innocent North Koreans? Or topple the regime? Or what am I misunderstanding?

MagentaYenta

Tue, Jul 04 2017, 10:07 pm

amother wrote:

Do you really expect to be immune to the fallout from a nuke landing in AK or NK?

oliveoil

Tue, Jul 04 2017, 10:07 pm

marina wrote:

You're asking why we don't obliterate 25 million innocent North Koreans? Or topple the regime? Or what am I misunderstanding?

Thank you! People hear "North Korea" and they think "crazy kim". What they should be thinking about is the millions of people who live there in dire circumstances who cannot leave.

amother

Green

Tue, Jul 04 2017, 10:41 pm

marina wrote:

You're asking why we don't obliterate 25 million innocent North Koreans? Or topple the regime? Or what am I misunderstanding?

I'm asking in terms of toppling the regime. The U.S. can obliterate the N.K. military fairly quickly and easily. The main thing stopping the u.s. from doing this is the potential consequences it will have on S.korea because of the likelihood that as Kim realizes he's going down, he might take a couple million S. Korean civilians with him. That is the reason the U.S. can't win militarily against N.K.. How does tonight's demonstration of power change things? We all know 2 things:
1. The U.S. military is far more advanced and powerful than the N.K. military.
2. The U.S. can't take military action against N.K. because of the potential consequences it will have on S. Korea.

amother

Purple

Tue, Jul 04 2017, 10:48 pm

amother wrote:

Honestly, you sound quite ignorant of the situation.

Jeanette

Tue, Jul 04 2017, 11:53 pm

amother wrote:

Honestly, you sound quite ignorant of the situation.

She is at least trying to learn and understand.
More than I can say for a lot of people.

MagentaYenta

Wed, Jul 05 2017, 12:03 am

amother wrote:

I'm asking in terms of toppling the regime. The ...

The US has a pretty poor success rate when it comes to regime change. It is assumed that NK now has the ability to fire a nuclear warhead on the US, even if it only reaches Alaska.

I'm pretty sure any nation's willingness to enter into a nuclear war would not end well in the long run. Once upon a time it was called mutually assured self destruction.

DrMom

Wed, Jul 05 2017, 12:33 am

I believe this was all predicted 20 years ago when the Clinton administration gave them $4 billion in "energy aid" with the promise that they would dismantle their nuclear program and become part of the global community.

How'd that work out?

No idea what we should do about this now, but we will probably need help from China.

treestump

Wed, Jul 05 2017, 7:12 am

amother wrote:

I'm asking in terms of toppling the regime.

Last time we tried toppling a regime, ISIS was formed.

Think Iraq, Vietnam, Afghanistan... we're experts at destabilizing entire regions with tragic, wide-reaching consequences.

PinkFridge

Wed, Jul 05 2017, 8:09 am

DrMom wrote:

Sounds like Clinton and Obama had the same poli sci prof.

amother

Green

Wed, Jul 05 2017, 8:12 am

amother wrote:

Honestly, you sound quite ignorant of the situation.

That's helpful. Educate me please. I'm trying to understand it. Btw, I don't see the other posters claiming my post is ignorant.

Cmon be nice

Wed, Jul 05 2017, 9:05 am

I was just reading about the Korean war. In the 1950s we tried defeating N Korea and weren't able to do it. It seems that since we won WW2 we haven't been able to win these things anymore.
It also isn't politically correct to drop an atom bomb anymore (at least for us). Look how many protests there are every year on the anniversary of us nuking the Japanese even though that's how we got them to surrender.

DrMom

Wed, Jul 05 2017, 9:22 am

Just some background:

The Korean War never officially ended. We have a cease-fire with them.

Whereas most Americans haven't given NK more than a passing thought since the 1950s (well, maybe they do now), NK is obsessed with the fact that the war was never resolved. For 70 years, NK schools have been educating NK children from a young age that the evil oppressive capitalist American Imperialists are just itching to destroy them, but that their superior military and Great Leader is keeping them at bay. But look out! Any minute they might come swooping in to attack!

iyar

Wed, Jul 05 2017, 10:00 am

North Korea just stated it is in the final stages of developing a nuclear weapon capable of reaching parts of the U.S. It won't happen!

That's a tweet our president sent out in January.
Looks like he was wrong.
There doesn't seem to be an effective way to stop them.
Sanctions? Um No. Their leader doesn't care if half or two thirds or 80% of his people starve to death. He'll make sure he has a good dinner.
War? Military strategy isn't my thing but the outlook doesn't sound great.
Daven.

MagentaYenta

Wed, Jul 05 2017, 10:34 am

Cmon be nice wrote:

Politically correct? It's beyond that. Why do we want to pollute the earth with even more radiation? The bombs we have now are one hundred times more powerful than those dropped on Japan.

Do people think this radiation just goes away? Japan suffered generations of child deformities and radiation caused miscarriages. Heck, the radiation from Fukashima is already being found in the Pacific fisheries.

People should think long and hard before they suggest dropping nuclear bombs.