freeman3
Ricky...does it not bother you that Kim's likely goal here is to conquer the SK?
You think?
Duh.
His primary goal, however is survival. And regime survival.
He will only attempt an invasion of SK if he thinks he can survive the inevitable repercussion. Neither he nor his father seem to be have been that far removed from reality that they think that they or their regimes could survive all out war.
The purpose of his nuclear capabilities is to ensure that he can inflict enough damage on SK, Japan and perhaps the US that the US will not risk aggressive action against NK. They are not going to give NK the chance of winning a nuclear conflict. And Un knows this... He knows their use would be his destruction.
The notion that UN is likely to be the first to risk any kind of aggression, is greatly over hyped.Along the lines of the threat from Ebola.
The US risking a strike of any kind will inevitably see some kind of response from NK.... Probably an all put response with all of their assets. A doomed response yes. But one that will leave millions dead, and the world economy in ruins.
The equation of risk versus reward is heavily weighted in favour of not striking NK first. Why?
1) NK is highly unlikely to risk aggression.
2) NK is virtually certain to retaliate to any aggression with all possible assets.
In either case the Korean peninsula will be destroyed.
hence the third option:
- Do nothing militarily unless NK does actually make a move. In which case missile defense systems, and the high probability of NK dysfunction.... have a high probability of lessening their effectiveness.... before NK is destroyed in a brief but justifiable action which will be allowed by Chinese government that has warned NK...
There is risk in this policy. But far less than in the inevitable results of options 1 or 2. And the reward is peace; and the potential for a solution to be achieved through other means.