Quote (dro94 @ Jul 4 2017 07:01pm)
Yeah it's a tough one and there is merit to that argument considering the uncertainty involved, but without a doubt it would be a significant human rights abuse in terms of innocents killed.
Maybe I missed it in the article, but I think an important factor in the likelihood of NK using nuclear weapons is that it is a 3rd world country which relies heavily on military posturing for its propaganda. Like Russia, they promote hatred of the West to direct attention away from the glaring failures of their own countries, so the pursuit of nuclear weapons helps to consolidate power internally and give their citizens a sense of pride. That is the main objective of the nuclear weapons program, not destroying the US, in my opinion.
Quote
In short, North Korea is a problem with no solution … except time.
True, time works in favor of Kim getting what he wants. Every test, successful or not, brings him closer to building his prized weapons. When he has nuclear ICBMs, North Korea will have a more potent and lethal strike capability against the United States and its allies, but no chance of destroying America, or winning a war, and therefore no better chance of avoiding the inevitable consequence of launching a nuke: national suicide. Kim may end up trapped in the circular logic of his strategy. He seeks to avoid destruction by building a weapon that, if used, assures his destruction.
His regime thrives on crisis. Perhaps when he feels safe enough with his arsenal, he might turn to more-sensible goals, like building the North Korean economy, opening trade, and ending its decades of extreme isolation. All of these are the very things that create the framework needed for disarmament.
But acceptance, while the right choice, is yet another bad one. With such missiles, Kim might feel emboldened to move on South Korea. Would the U.S. sacrifice Los Angeles to save Seoul? The same calculation drove the U.K. and France to develop their own nuclear weapons during the Cold War. Trump has already suggested that South Korea and Japan might want to consider building nuclear programs. In this way, acceptance could lead to more nuclear-armed states and ever greater chances that one will use the weapons.
With his arsenal, Kim may well become an even more destabilizing force in the region. There is a good chance that he would try to negotiate from strength with Seoul and Washington, forging some kind of confederation with the South that leads to the removal of U.S. forces from the peninsula. If talks were to resume, Trump had better enter them with his eyes open, because Kim, who sees himself as the divinely inspired heir to leadership of all the Korean people, is not likely to be satisfied with only his half of the peninsula.
Similar to Iran's nuclear ambitions, it's little about the worst case scenario, and more about moves in the future after the country has nukes.