The waiting game is over. North Korea seemingly has the ability to attack the mainland of the United States. The United States has a missile defense system, yet if we hope to avoid any type of rebuttal or preemptive strike, the United States needs to get to the negotiating table with the rogue nation or (unannounced) attack Pyongyang and North Korean military infrastructure. However, in the event that Kim Jong-Il and his regime are wiped out, we should leave the nation building to the South Koreans to avoid the almost unavoidable power vacuum and human rights crisis which will come after the fall of North Korea.
Search
colinkruse
Aug 10, 2017
Should the USA preemptively strike North Korea?
Should the USA preemptively strike North Korea?
If the US should preemptively strike North Korea, will North Korea attack Seoul/South Korea?
The US is currently handling a missile defense system in South Korea. Despite what the Chinese say, we should make this system capable of consistently rebuking a nuclear strike. That is the only way we can strike North Korea and destroy them without retaliation.
Are you referring to THAAD or a different missile defense system in South Korea?
To answer your questions, to my knowledge of the conflict, we have a few options if North Korea were to launch a missile. There's the THAAD and then the South Koreans have a missile defense system as well. Obviously, I didn't address the probably destruction of Seoul due to North Korean artillery fire. Military action is easier said than done, but I believe that the best course of action would be to go after missile launch sites as well as the guns pointing at Seoul.
I agree with that. How feasible do you think that course of action would be?
Not very. I feel that both are bluffing. Trump's trying to improve his approval numbers and Kim-Jong Un is trying to scare the US off.
Do you feel as though we're headed towards a stalemate?
In my opinion, absolutely not. Although we have the ability to wipe out North Korea, this is not something the United States should do unless it is absolutely necessary. First of all, if Trump were to fire anything at North Korea it would cause international outrage and many problems within the U.S.. It would place the blame of causing a humanitarian crisis on our shoulders, not to mention the damage that could potentially be done within the South China Sea as a rebuttal from North Korea. The decision would ,more likely than not, be viewed as incredibly stupid by the American public, resulting in national conflict, and even worse is that it could also create a domino effect with global nuclear war. I know that would be a long shot, but bear with me - if we presumptively strike North Korea this would set a new global standard, which would be that using nuclear weapons would no longer be a last resort. The U.S. feels threatened by North Korea, but what about all of the countries that have nuclear capabilities that feel threatened by the United States? This would send a message to them that using nuclear weapons is ok, and could result in a lot of very deadly international conflict.