Do you really think it possible that North Korea and the US will engage in Nuclear...
Poll
Do you really think North Korea and the United States will engage in a Nuclear War?
Just interested in people's thoughts:
Do you really think it possible that North Korea and the United States will actually engage in Nuclear War?
Vote on the poll!
Why? Why not?
Does North Korea really have the guts? Or are they just posturing to obtain a higher bargaining position? Or are they in collusion with Iran to deflect attention from Iranian nuclear development?
Will other countries get involved? The last time a nuclear weapon was used (not in testing - in actual war) was in 1945! It's nearly 70 years since then! And nukes weren't so abundant on Earth. Do you really think they will be used here?
What do you think?
Do you really think it possible that North Korea and the United States will actually engage in Nuclear War?
Vote on the poll!
Why? Why not?
Does North Korea really have the guts? Or are they just posturing to obtain a higher bargaining position? Or are they in collusion with Iran to deflect attention from Iranian nuclear development?
Will other countries get involved? The last time a nuclear weapon was used (not in testing - in actual war) was in 1945! It's nearly 70 years since then! And nukes weren't so abundant on Earth. Do you really think they will be used here?
What do you think?
(edited 11 years ago)
Scroll to see replies
I think nuclear weapons are more of a deterrent than anything else, and I can't really say whether a situation like this would arise. I sure hope not.
No. They'd be absolutely merked by the States and the UN.
Original post by mikeyd85
No. They'd be absolutely merked by the States and the UN.
Surely it'd really depend on what occurs. For example, if North Korea fires first, say at Washington, that'll clearly be terrible. Even if NK goes down after their first strike, it'll still be devastating for the world. Potentially, Washington would be decimated, command would revert to wherever it does in the event of an attack on the Capital and the country would be plunged into turmoil. The President would probably be dead - along with other important figures depending on their whereabouts etc.
In reference to the OP:
I actually think that it's highly unlikely for a Nuke war between NK and the US - but then again, because I feel so safe and secure right now and haven't ever been in a time of total war or threat of total war (e.g. World War or Cold War), I feel it' highly unlikely for any Nuke war to occur (even like in the TV series "Last Resort" where Nuke war was contained in a single region). The Media is just hyping. Kim just met an American basketball player recently and was laughing and talking. I really don't think NK intend to engage in a nuke war - so much so, that I'm not taking anything they say seriously about "attacking America". Yeah, right - and they meet with American businessmen and sports-persons.
Original post by rainbow.panda
I think nuclear weapons are more of a deterrent than anything else, and I can't really say whether a situation like this would arise. I sure hope not.
But that's banking on the fact that they are used in a contained manner and situation. What if you engage in a pre-emptive strike and then the other country fires some from a facility that you missed?
The thing about nuclear was is that it is very uncertain. Anything could happen. Anything could go wrong.
And then there's the chaos and uncertainty that occurs. And out of that chaos, opportunists arise and use the distraction as a disadvantage (say, for example, Argentina suddenly invading the Falklands; Japanese forces suddenly converging on those Pacific islands; Israel bombing Iran).
I genuinely think that once even a single nuke is used, all hell will break loose. This will be no Hiroshima where people are shocked into submission - lots more people have nukes now.
Nuclear weapons are always just used to strike fear in another country, although I may be wrong, but by then it will be too late anyways and eventually we'll all be living in Fallout 3 Vaults.
Original post by HumanSupremacist
Surely it'd really depend on what occurs. For example, if North Korea fires first, say at Washington, that'll clearly be terrible. Even if NK goes down after their first strike, it'll still be devastating for the world. Potentially, Washington would be decimated, command would revert to wherever it does in the event of an attack on the Capital and the country would be plunged into turmoil. The President would probably be dead - along with other important figures depending on their whereabouts etc.
I would imagine America has contingency plans for a nuclear attack on Washington which would move power quickly and efficiently to an alternate location. I think America would survive an attack on it's capital quite well tbh.
NO NO NO NO NO.
In response to NK's recent nuclear test against the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, the west is about to impose deeper economic sanctions. That cannot go without a response from the NK leadership. However, they have nothing but rhetoric with which to strike back.
Kim Jung Un is a man schooled in the west and well versed in western politics and democracy. He knows how to push the western media buttons to his own political ends.
He is doing just that by demonstrably flexing his muscles in a public display, not to threaten the west (not in any meaningful physical way), but as propaganda for consumption by his own people to justify continued expenditure of the majority of his countries resources on his military - even though it means his people go without.
The country is 50 - 70 years behind the rest of the world in terms of development. Control of the people has to be maintained through fear and intimidation. Kim knows that he must demonstrate his governments policies work to keep the population safe from the 'tyrannical western oppressors and puppet nations'. i.e. The U.S., South Korea and Japan.
A nuclear capability and sabre rattling is a way of demonstrating technological prowess, political strength and keeping the fabricated wolves from the door. Motivation for his people to continue in ignorance and not question what they are told.
After WWII, the US and the west developed a policy of 'no first strike' with regards to nukes.
That policy has held true for the last 70 years and it won't change because democracy won't allow it to. It's true, the US president could potentially order a first strike but then it would have to go through the services for it to be executed and that's where it will stop because questions will be asked and the president better demonstrate a clear, present and compelling danger and the backing of a lot of people or it won't happen.
If a state such as NK were to strike first they know they would be 'erased' within hours.
China increasingly views the NK leadership as an embarrassment and a thorn in it's side. Kim Jung Un's actions will only serve to strengthen that perception. China has too much to lose as her economic interests are too intertwined with the west to threaten that stability. China knows that to take sides with NK in a potential nuclear war would be to risk Mutually Assured Destruction, destabilise her own internal affairs and economic prosperity with the threat of internal civil war and commotion, mass migrations and an overthrow of their whole government system. It's not a democracy, but is ever moving towards democracy. The political status quo cannot be maintained.
That would leave NK isolated without Allies and faced with total annihilation. In those circumstances China would broker talks and put immense pressure on NK. She would not sit on the fence or side with NK.
Indeed if things looked like it was getting out of hand, China has the option to take matters into her own hands and attack NK with conventional forces to annexe the rogue state, depose the existing NK leadership and impose her own leaders as heads of state.
Better that pragmatic (if costly) solution than risk a pointless global nuclear war.
There are always options other than that. In the meantime the war of words continues.
Move along now, nothing to see here.
In response to NK's recent nuclear test against the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, the west is about to impose deeper economic sanctions. That cannot go without a response from the NK leadership. However, they have nothing but rhetoric with which to strike back.
Kim Jung Un is a man schooled in the west and well versed in western politics and democracy. He knows how to push the western media buttons to his own political ends.
He is doing just that by demonstrably flexing his muscles in a public display, not to threaten the west (not in any meaningful physical way), but as propaganda for consumption by his own people to justify continued expenditure of the majority of his countries resources on his military - even though it means his people go without.
The country is 50 - 70 years behind the rest of the world in terms of development. Control of the people has to be maintained through fear and intimidation. Kim knows that he must demonstrate his governments policies work to keep the population safe from the 'tyrannical western oppressors and puppet nations'. i.e. The U.S., South Korea and Japan.
A nuclear capability and sabre rattling is a way of demonstrating technological prowess, political strength and keeping the fabricated wolves from the door. Motivation for his people to continue in ignorance and not question what they are told.
After WWII, the US and the west developed a policy of 'no first strike' with regards to nukes.
That policy has held true for the last 70 years and it won't change because democracy won't allow it to. It's true, the US president could potentially order a first strike but then it would have to go through the services for it to be executed and that's where it will stop because questions will be asked and the president better demonstrate a clear, present and compelling danger and the backing of a lot of people or it won't happen.
If a state such as NK were to strike first they know they would be 'erased' within hours.
China increasingly views the NK leadership as an embarrassment and a thorn in it's side. Kim Jung Un's actions will only serve to strengthen that perception. China has too much to lose as her economic interests are too intertwined with the west to threaten that stability. China knows that to take sides with NK in a potential nuclear war would be to risk Mutually Assured Destruction, destabilise her own internal affairs and economic prosperity with the threat of internal civil war and commotion, mass migrations and an overthrow of their whole government system. It's not a democracy, but is ever moving towards democracy. The political status quo cannot be maintained.
That would leave NK isolated without Allies and faced with total annihilation. In those circumstances China would broker talks and put immense pressure on NK. She would not sit on the fence or side with NK.
Indeed if things looked like it was getting out of hand, China has the option to take matters into her own hands and attack NK with conventional forces to annexe the rogue state, depose the existing NK leadership and impose her own leaders as heads of state.
Better that pragmatic (if costly) solution than risk a pointless global nuclear war.
There are always options other than that. In the meantime the war of words continues.
Move along now, nothing to see here.
(edited 11 years ago)
Original post by HomoSapiensSap
Just interested in people's thoughts:
Do you really think it possible that North Korea and the United States will actually engage in Nuclear War?
Vote on the poll!
Why? Why not?
Does North Korea really have the guts? Or are they just posturing to obtain a higher bargaining position? Or are they in collusion with Iran to deflect attention from Iranian nuclear development?
Will other countries get involved? The last time a nuclear weapon was used (not in testing - in actual war) was in 1945! It's nearly 70 years since then! And nukes weren't so abundant on Earth. Do you really think they will be used here?
What do you think?
Do you really think it possible that North Korea and the United States will actually engage in Nuclear War?
Vote on the poll!
Why? Why not?
Does North Korea really have the guts? Or are they just posturing to obtain a higher bargaining position? Or are they in collusion with Iran to deflect attention from Iranian nuclear development?
Will other countries get involved? The last time a nuclear weapon was used (not in testing - in actual war) was in 1945! It's nearly 70 years since then! And nukes weren't so abundant on Earth. Do you really think they will be used here?
What do you think?
North Korea can't hit the US with a nuke, they don't have the capacity
The leaders of North Korea are retarded, but they're not suicidal
I don't think the US will have to do much. North Korea will probably end up nuking themselves by accident.
Not unless North Korea wants be wiped off the map. They aren't stupid, they know they'll get obliterated. Anyway I think China might have a few things to say about it as well.
Original post by HumanSupremacist
Surely it'd really depend on what occurs. For example, if North Korea fires first, say at Washington, that'll clearly be terrible. Even if NK goes down after their first strike, it'll still be devastating for the world. Potentially, Washington would be decimated, command would revert to wherever it does in the event of an attack on the Capital and the country would be plunged into turmoil. The President would probably be dead - along with other important figures depending on their whereabouts etc.
In reference to the OP:
I actually think that it's highly unlikely for a Nuke war between NK and the US - but then again, because I feel so safe and secure right now and haven't ever been in a time of total war or threat of total war (e.g. World War or Cold War), I feel it' highly unlikely for any Nuke war to occur (even like in the TV series "Last Resort" where Nuke war was contained in a single region). The Media is just hyping. Kim just met an American basketball player recently and was laughing and talking. I really don't think NK intend to engage in a nuke war - so much so, that I'm not taking anything they say seriously about "attacking America". Yeah, right - and they meet with American businessmen and sports-persons.
In reference to the OP:
I actually think that it's highly unlikely for a Nuke war between NK and the US - but then again, because I feel so safe and secure right now and haven't ever been in a time of total war or threat of total war (e.g. World War or Cold War), I feel it' highly unlikely for any Nuke war to occur (even like in the TV series "Last Resort" where Nuke war was contained in a single region). The Media is just hyping. Kim just met an American basketball player recently and was laughing and talking. I really don't think NK intend to engage in a nuke war - so much so, that I'm not taking anything they say seriously about "attacking America". Yeah, right - and they meet with American businessmen and sports-persons.
This threat has existed for so long, I think it's pretty likely America has the capability now to shoot down a missile from NK. At least, they say they do.
Original post by HomoSapiensSap
Just interested in people's thoughts:
Do you really think it possible that North Korea and the United States will actually engage in Nuclear War?
Vote on the poll!
Why? Why not?
Does North Korea really have the guts? Or are they just posturing to obtain a higher bargaining position? Or are they in collusion with Iran to deflect attention from Iranian nuclear development?
Will other countries get involved? The last time a nuclear weapon was used (not in testing - in actual war) was in 1945! It's nearly 70 years since then! And nukes weren't so abundant on Earth. Do you really think they will be used here?
What do you think?
Do you really think it possible that North Korea and the United States will actually engage in Nuclear War?
Vote on the poll!
Why? Why not?
Does North Korea really have the guts? Or are they just posturing to obtain a higher bargaining position? Or are they in collusion with Iran to deflect attention from Iranian nuclear development?
Will other countries get involved? The last time a nuclear weapon was used (not in testing - in actual war) was in 1945! It's nearly 70 years since then! And nukes weren't so abundant on Earth. Do you really think they will be used here?
What do you think?
No, North Korea is posturing and will back down when the US offers them food. North Korea has at most a couple of nuclear warheads, which if they manage to put onto their longest range rockets could reach Alaska. The US has over 5000 nuclear weapons, though I doubt they would ever use them.
Ok. Do none of you know that the US (and Russia, China etc.) has hundreds of anti-ballistic missiles set up specifically to take down nuclear missiles. North Korea could launch 10 nuclear missiles on perfect trajectories for D.C. and the US would just shoot them down.
Chance of NK firing nukes: Small, but not insignificant.
Chance of nuke detonating on non-NK soil: None
Chance of NK firing nukes: Small, but not insignificant.
Chance of nuke detonating on non-NK soil: None
we cannot be sure if north korea will do a japan on America
I voted don't know.
Purely because while I've no doubt that if it did happen the US would win, to me from what I've seen the argument about North Korea not attacking seems to come down to the fact that they know they would lose, and this is based on the premise that they will act with rationality.
There was an interesting comment I read on the Guardian article about NK the other day actually which talked about the NK leadership being stuck between a rock and a hard place. Basically the guy was saying that what the leadership have got to do to their own people is appear as strong as the people that preceded them, live up to their office essentially. Unfortunately for NK the way that's been done thus far is with confrontation with the most powerful country on earth...
- the point of all this being that unless the NK leadership don't keep upping the ante with the US so to speak, they begin to appear weaker to their own people and thus their authority, and afterwards, their state crumbles ultimately (the leadership themselves are also probably killed in the process), and so the actions they undertake are driven by fear/paranoia, which does not breed rational thought.
It was an interesting view on it I think, and one which for me based on the little that i know, sounds plausible, since during my studies I've come across similar situations where people ended up doing incredibly stupid things because they were in a position they couldn't back down from.
Purely because while I've no doubt that if it did happen the US would win, to me from what I've seen the argument about North Korea not attacking seems to come down to the fact that they know they would lose, and this is based on the premise that they will act with rationality.
There was an interesting comment I read on the Guardian article about NK the other day actually which talked about the NK leadership being stuck between a rock and a hard place. Basically the guy was saying that what the leadership have got to do to their own people is appear as strong as the people that preceded them, live up to their office essentially. Unfortunately for NK the way that's been done thus far is with confrontation with the most powerful country on earth...
- the point of all this being that unless the NK leadership don't keep upping the ante with the US so to speak, they begin to appear weaker to their own people and thus their authority, and afterwards, their state crumbles ultimately (the leadership themselves are also probably killed in the process), and so the actions they undertake are driven by fear/paranoia, which does not breed rational thought.
It was an interesting view on it I think, and one which for me based on the little that i know, sounds plausible, since during my studies I've come across similar situations where people ended up doing incredibly stupid things because they were in a position they couldn't back down from.
Original post by study beats
we cannot be sure if north korea will do a japan on America
These are much more different times. I don't even think that relative to that time, North Korea is on par with Japan.
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Will World War 3 happen soon?
- Where to study physics that isn't in a big city and a whole bunch of other questions!
- Which course do i pick?
- Name a country or city with the last letter of the previous one
- a level history - edexcel cold war coursework
- Improvement in work experience application in medical physics
- Kpop Dance Crew in London???
- Nuclear Graduate Programme
- [Official Thread] Russian invasion of Ukraine
- I need advice about my toxic Sister!
- How does studying abroad work?
- Year Abroad in S. Korea: My Experience
- Changing from Chemical Engineering to Medicine
- A nuclear attack may have started now.
- The north of England should separate from the south
- history epq
- Kallisto's Saturday Question: Foreign Country or World Trip?
- Applying to Study Korean - My Experience
- UCL or Durham?
- Southerners - Could You Live Up North?
Latest
Trending
Last reply 1 day ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 1 day ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 1 day ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 1 day ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 1 day ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 1 day ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
