1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Will North Korea Nuke South Korea?

Discussion in 'Off Topic' started by Slavik, Mar 8, 2013.

  1. Slavik

    Slavik XenForo Moderator Staff Member

    What are your thoughts? Whilst logically, such an action would end in the almost guaranteed end of NK as we know it when all the allied powers would then invade and dismantle the country, the rhetoric coming from NK has been getting increasingly unstable.

    Further adding sanctions onto NK will only enflame the situation (incidentally I don't agree with the sanctions applied to NK, I feel if a country wishes to advance its technological abilites, they should be free to do so)

    Personally, I think its only a matter of time before NK takes some offensive action on a large scale on SK. The growing instability seems to be too far gone at this point to turn back. NK feel they have the right to continue with their nuclear program, and they will, and that will increase the sanctions applied, and the situation will just keep escalating.

    Your thoughts?
  2. Hyperion

    Hyperion Active Member

    Well, even the usually more sympathetic power China sees North Korea as a brat, but it is a brat whose upper echelons wants to keep itself in power. Launching a nuke is definitely not the way to do that, neither is launching an invasion that would prompt overwhelming support (including in the form of military aid) for South Korea from the world community.

    If the world community, under the U.N., decides to finish the job that General MacArthur tried decades ago, North Korea cannot count on China stepping in again, provided it does not ironically throw its lot with the world community this time, or at least turn a blind eye to what is going on.

    China is much more business-oriented now (I see it as a capitalistic oligarchy rather than communist), cares a great deal for the world's opinion of it and making sure investment keeps flowing, and alienating the world community is not the way to do that. Along those lines, I think it prefers such a destabilizing scenario does not occur in the first place, as I believe all states, including North Korea, do. China is no longer operating under the Cold War view that if it does not defend a communist neighbor it is next.

    My nowhere-near-scholarly, just-a-layman-opinion anyway. That is just the impression I have been getting as an American citizen.
    DRE and Crayo like this.
  3. wickedstangs

    wickedstangs Well-Known Member

    won't happen.. South Korea "one of America's closest allies and greatest friends."
  4. jmurrayhead

    jmurrayhead Well-Known Member

    I really don't want America to get involved. We have enough problems here.
  5. Nasr

    Nasr Well-Known Member

    There is no gain for America to invade N. Korea. Otherwise, they'd already done so.
    Wuebit and Lucas like this.
  6. wickedstangs

    wickedstangs Well-Known Member

    I understand that....:( But, we owe it to them, At the request of the United States, President Park Chung-hee sent troops to Vietnam to assist American troops during the Vietnam War.
  7. Crayo

    Crayo Active Member

    I think it's highly unlikely. North Korea like to make these empty threats and act as if they do as they please. Even China, their only ally, are more or less fed up with the provocative nature of North Korea. No way would North Korea ignite a world war - a war they would get destroyed in - for such unnecessary reasons. It's got to the point where a "It's North Korea being North Korea again" reply is relevant; they've been doing this for a while now and it's simply boring.
  8. erich37

    erich37 Well-Known Member

    But Israel will nuke United States.

    Wuebit and BlackJacket like this.
  9. Hyperion

    Hyperion Active Member

    Yeah, recently signed a free trade agreement with them, and they are one of only a few Asian countries we allow visa-less travel from according to a 7 March, 2013, article published in the San Bernardino County Sun, just to give two recent economic examples of our close relations with South Korea.
  10. AdamD

    AdamD Well-Known Member

    Can't see it happening, myself.

    But they seem to get away with so much and all they get, is a slap on the back of the hand, which just angers their child like mentality even more.

    But given that they supposedly torpedoed that South korean ship, I can just see them strapping a nuke on a sub, sailing it into south korea and detonating it.
  11. Hyperion

    Hyperion Active Member

    North Korea has a long history of such infractions with South Korea, several of which would serve as better examples of their history of hostility, one being when they sent a commando unit down that was specifically trained for the purpose of assassinating the South Korean president.
  12. DBA

    DBA Well-Known Member

    Isn't their leader only ~22 years old? I'm a couple years older and even though I've always been considered more mature for my age, I don't think somebody our age has had enough life experience to lead a country. Much less a country like that.
  13. Crayo

    Crayo Active Member

    He's 30. I guess when you're raised by a long-serving dictator it comes naturally.
  14. Deebs

    Deebs Well-Known Member

    Check for oil. :p
    Wuebit and DRE like this.
  15. MrC

    MrC Active Member

    Invading a country that has nuclear weapons is suicidal. Nuking a country without a very good reason is also suicidal.
  16. Biker

    Biker Well-Known Member

    The rhetoric coming out of NK is no different than the BS that Daddy used to spew for decades.
  17. Slavik

    Slavik XenForo Moderator Staff Member

    Thing is, now we have a "young" leader who is probbaly being pressured by much older advisers to take action.
  18. Biker

    Biker Well-Known Member

    Doubtful. If anything, the older advisers are keeping him in check. While you may have the odd radical in the ranks, they're not stupid. They know full well what would happen if they stepped in it.
  19. Slavik

    Slavik XenForo Moderator Staff Member

    Given the absolute brainwashing these advisors have most likely been subjected to... i would think it would be the other way around in reality...
  20. Hyperion

    Hyperion Active Member

    Not necessarily on that first point, depending on the definition of suicidal (though I agree that is always a very, very bad idea, and war in general from my political standpoint). The exception I have in mind is the Kargil War of 1999, the only instance of two nuclear powers fighting a large scale conventional war against each other. Pakistan invaded despite India having nukes, thinking that its own nukes would prevent full-scale troop deployment for retaliation, which proved false. To be fair, Pakistan did show movement of nuclear weapons toward the front lines, but India showed restraint in staying within the border to prevent escalation.

    Of course, does not change the "suicidal" nature of attacking a country with nukes, but a very interesting example of two nuclear countries not ending their conflict in the worst case scenario that seems all too easy when full scale conventional hostilities open up, with one side going so far as to invade.
    Robert F Schmitz and MrC like this.

Share This Page