North Korea Threatens 'Merciless' Retaliation.

Actually, history would tell us most of the errors in that arena are caused by politicians who don't understand the nature of fighting and warfare because they've got precisely no experience of it. They then get the military into situations that are less than ideal and make the situation far messier than needed.

But equally worrying, is the large percentage [though, realistically, still a minority] of the US public who would be 'happy' for a war.



A billion? Let's start by being vaguely realistic.
A Korean war would not turn into a world war, there isn't 'enough' at stake for other countries to get involved. Certainly no European nations would feel threatened.

if america tries anything stupid...then i would say there are atleast 5 countries waiting to nuke the USA...

so its not only north korea who would get battered

Actually, history would tell us most of the errors in that arena are caused by politicians who don't understand the nature of fighting and warfare because they've got precisely no experience of it. They then get the military into situations that are less than ideal and make the situation far messier than needed.

But equally worrying, is the large percentage [though, realistically, still a minority] of the US public who would be 'happy' for a war.



A billion? Let's start by being vaguely realistic.
A Korean war would not turn into a world war, there isn't 'enough' at stake for other countries to get involved. Certainly no European nations would feel threatened.



Oh be quiet. While one or two nations may think badly about the US, none of them would actively want to nuke them. And even fewer of them actually could.

The mainland US is in no way threatened.

I'm intrigued to know what five countries they are. I can only think of two, neither of which is in a strong position to do so.

how do u know?

thats what everyone thought during world war 2.....what did america and japan have anything to do with germanys insane attacks in Europe?

think about it pal....they never had anything at stake...so why did they get involved?

i think the US is easily threatened, people have submarines and jet planes

umm let me see

iraq
iran
the whole middle east basically (strong militaries and some nukes)
pakistan
india
north korea
china (maybe)
japan (maybe want revenge from WW2)
russia also maybe?

You're deranged.

They had plenty at stake.
Japan were violently increasing their empire, threatening everything in the Pacific area, including our commonwealth nations. The US did not want to be surrounded by nations intent on warmongering and rapid expansion and were begged to get involved by nations who were directly threatened.

This situation is different. If the war restarts [it never technically ended] it will be due to NK aggression and the US will assist the South. It's most likely that China will not get involved, except closing it's border to NK to prevent millions of refugees flooding into them.
There is little to no scope for other nations to attack the US, as they're basically the only country capable of fighting wars on more than one front.

scared bro?

This isn't a movie, little dear.

Countries are not just going to simply pop off nukes like there's no tomorrow. Even with Japan and the US, the US did not just pop off a nuke without any foresight and deliberation and just pressed the button dancing around as if it was the funniest thing in the world.

ur one who thinks this is call of duty

I am not your 'bro'.

And I'd be scared if you were at the button. But thankfully, even North Korea aren't insane enough to put someone as mentally deficient as you in charge of weapons.

USAs attack on north korea would put other countries in the surrounding area at risk because of the dangerous attacks wouldnt it?

umm let me see

iraq
iran
the whole middle east basically (strong militaries and some nukes)
pakistan
india
north korea
china (maybe)
japan (maybe want revenge from WW2)
russia also maybe?

And that includes Iraq how? It's 4,500 miles away.

And of the other countries nearby, South Korea is firmly with the US. Japan is firmly with the US, China needs the US more than it needs NK and Russia is in no position to do anything about it.

In the middle east, only Iran and Israel have nuclear technology. In spite of all the fuss over the last ten years, Iran does not appear to have a functioning nuclear weapon (nobody trusts them not to use it if they did, hence the fuss). Israel is one of the US's closest allies.

Pakistan is more concerned with India, and only has land-launched IRBMs so no risk to the US anyway. India is more concerned with Pakistan, and has no great enmity with the US. India is also sufficiently tied in with the west world that they can be relied upon to grasp MAD, and anyway maintaining good relations with the US and Europe is in their economic interest.

China and Russia are two of the five major nuclear weapon states; if we all managed not to wipe each other out in the cold war, it's certainly not going to happen now.

Japan is another of the US's close allies, and also does not possess nuclear weapons. It's actually in the Japanese constitution that they cannot possess or develop nuclear weapons technology.

Which leaves North Korea, which may or may not possess usable nuclear weapons but certainly does not have a long range delivery system. So again, little or no direct risk to the US.

the radiation from nuke could flow in rivers and seas and affect other countries, people will be mad at the USA

but what if all that could change?