• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Pentagon: North Korean Missiles Can Reach The United States

Highly unlikely.

What? China is already jumping ship on North Korea.

If North Korea were to send a nuke this way, China would surely turn their back on them.
 
If North Korea actually did nuke the the United States, that would be the end of North Korea. Period.

Yes.
But it would also be the end of the US as Russia and the PRC launch their nuclear arsenal against the US if they don't believe those nukes are heading towards only North Korea.

And then the US will launch the rest of it's nuclear arsenal against them.

And now welcome to the wonderful world of global thermonuclear war.
 
Yes.
But it would also be the end of the US as Russia and the PRC launch their nuclear arsenal against the US if they don't believe those nukes are heading towards only North Korea.

And then the US will launch the rest of it's nuclear arsenal against them.

And now welcome to the wonderful world of global thermonuclear war.

That's assuming Russia and China want to commit suicide.
 
Neither North Korea being a victim nor support of North Korea using nuclear weapons have any bearing on how difficult it would be for the US to engage in a military operation against North Korea, mostly because of its alliance with the People's Republic of China.

If the US was to engage in such military operations, the PRC would intervene on North Korea's behalf in order to maintain a buffer state on the Korean Peninsula. In which case there would be war between the US and the PRC. Which would be quite catastrophic.

Not to mention what NK's conventional rocket arsenal would do to the heavily populated S Korean cities. It would be devastation. It is up to PRC to keep their genie bottled up and I think even those N Korean nutcases understand it would be all over for them if they ever launched a nuclear device. They want more food aid again that is all this is about.
 
That's assuming Russia and China want to commit suicide.

No. That's assuming the doctrine of mutually assured destruction.

In regards to nuclear warfare, the goal isn't to survive - its to have he capability o utterly destroy your enemies in retaliation so they never use their nukes.

And Russia and PRC would want to bring down the US with them if they think the US is attacking them.
 
No. That's assuming the doctrine of mutually assured destruction.

In regards to nuclear warfare, the goal isn't to survive - its to have he capability o utterly destroy your enemies in retaliation so they never use their nukes.

And Russia and PRC would want to bring down the US with them if they think the US is attacking them.


Do you honestly think China is going to start sending nukes once North Korea does?

I feel like I'm having deja vu with the Cold War.....except I wasn't alive during the Cold War.
 
Do you honestly think China is going to start sending nukes once North Korea does?

I feel like I'm having deja vu with the Cold War.....except I wasn't alive during the Cold War.

Yeah - which is why you don't understand how serious it is when one country starts launching nukes against another.

It takes a few minutes for nukes to go across the globe. When one nation starts seeing nukes coming their way, it is highly unlikely that they will wait to see if those nukes are aimed at them or some other nation. And one nation can say they are targeting a different nation, but if they lie the nation that gets hit can't respond.

Which is why nuclear warfare is based around pre-emptive strikes and automatic retaliatory strikes. Nations aren't going to wait to see if a nuke actually hits them before they respond. They will assume that the nukes are after them, and then retaliate while they can to damage the first nation as much as they can.

Which is why nuclear weapons have only been used for warfare once in the history of this planet, and why nuclear war has never been actually fought on this planet - because those are weapons that are so destructive that they cannot be survived, and so opponents try to ensure the destruction of their enemies instead.
 
Yeah - which is why you don't understand how serious it is when one country starts launching nukes against another.

It takes a few minutes for nukes to go across the globe. When one nation starts seeing nukes coming their way, it is highly unlikely that they will wait to see if those nukes are aimed at them or some other nation. And one nation can say they are targeting a different nation, but if they lie the nation that gets hit can't respond.

Which is why nuclear warfare is based around pre-emptive strikes and automatic retaliatory strikes. Nations aren't going to wait to see if a nuke actually hits them before they respond. They will assume that the nukes are after them, and then retaliate while they can to damage the first nation as much as they can.

Which is why nuclear weapons have only been used for warfare once in the history of this planet, and why nuclear war has never been actually fought on this planet - because those are weapons that are so destructive that they cannot be survived, and so opponents try to ensure the destruction of their enemies instead.

So, what's the solution? She would preemptively strike, and have this end of world result, or wait for them (North Korea), and again (according to you) have this end of world result?
 
I know that NK is no threat the the US, because if it was then our government would have spent a TRILLION dollars to stop them from getting the bomb instead of on killing tent dwellers in the middle east.
 
So far, I see exactly two people on this thread who have a clue.


I have to wonder if it has something to do with having grown up during the Cold War, doing Civil Defense drills in school, all in deadly earnest.
 
There are complexities involved that most people don't seem to want to consider.

Complexities that may well mean we CAN'T just nuke NK flat in response to a single nuke-tipped missle thrown at a US target... or an SK or Japanese target, etc.

There's the threat of what a single nuke could do used in High-Altitute EMP mode to the entire North American continent.

There's China, and it's proximity to NK, and it's own nuclear arsenal. Not to mention SK and Japan could be downwind.

There's the question of Kim Jong Un, who grew up in NK knowing he was going to succeed his father as dictator, and how much contact there is between the world between his ears and Planet Consensus Reality... and whether he believes NK could get away with it.

There's also the question of how much does NK do that doesn't have tacit Chinese approval. Many people who study these things carefully believe China uses NK as a stalking horse and Judas Goat, much like Iran/Syria/Lebanon. A client state.

There's the question of what would happen to SK, with Seoul (capital city, over 40% of the population) sitting within range of NK's massive conventional artillery poised on the DMZ.

It's not as simon simple as some wish to believe, and there are reasons why massive US nuclear retaliation is NOT an automatic and assured response... and that very lack of certainty is one of the things that makes NK potentially dangerous.
 
the North Koreans aren't a direct military threat to the continental US.
If their missiles can reach the US, yes they are a direct threat.
 
If their missiles can reach the US, yes they are a direct threat.
No matter how much the sensationalism plays up these missiles intercontinental abilities, people are still gullible enough to fall for this crap. Nothing they have ever done demonstrates that they're even close to producing such capabilities.
 
No matter how much the sensationalism plays up these missiles intercontinental abilities, people are still gullible enough to fall for this crap. Nothing they have ever done demonstrates that they're even close to producing such capabilities.
Pardon me for deferring to the experts on this matter and not you.

Hagel also cited Pyongyang’s launch in December of a rocket that put a satellite into space and demonstrated mastery of some of the technologies needed to produce a long-range nuclear missile. And he noted that last April the North Koreans put on public display a road-mobile intercontinental ballistic missile, the KN-08. Navy Adm. James Winnefeld Jr., vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said that missile is believed to be capable of reaching U.S. territory. Winnefeld appeared with Hagel at Friday’s news conference.

Pentagon to beef up missile defense system designed to protect US against NKorean attack - The Washington Post

Yes they are a threat.
One you obviously don't get.
 
"Easy prey"? Is nK a victim?

Do you support nK using nukes?

They maybe rogue nations both N. Korea and Iran. They have the right to participate in the arms race.
 
If North Korea actually did nuke the the United States, that would be the end of North Korea. Period.

N. Korea is willing to go for broke kamikaze style. No winners in a war.
 
They maybe rogue nations both N. Korea and Iran. They have the right to participate in the arms race.

So you don't have any problem with nations agreeing to treaties in the UN and then becomming rogue terrorist states that disregard those agreements?

Do they have the right to be terrorists?

And let's not pretend that Iran is in any race. It's decades behind the US and will never - ever - catch up.
 
Last edited:
So you don't have any problem with nations agreeing to treaties in the UN and then becomming rogue terrorist states that disregard those agreements?

Do they have the right to be terrorists?

Wo are not living in a static world. It's a dynamic world. Decades old agreements become obsolete as time passes.
 
Wo are not living in a static world. It's a dynamic world. Decades old agreements become obsolete as time passes.

All the platitudes in the world are not gonna change reality. Iran is a terrorist nation that has broken nuclear agreements with the UN. They are not to be treated like any other country - they are to be treated according to their actions in particular.
 
All the platitudes in the world are not gonna change reality. Iran is a terrorist nation that has broken nuclear agreements with the UN. They are not to be treated like any other country - they are to be treated according to their actions in particular.

Walk the talk and lets see the consequences.
 
Walk the talk and lets see the consequences.

Oh, please! Are you now talking tough for the Iranian regime?

hahahaha


Look, dude, no matter what BS you might invent and no matter how inane, groundless and senseless your assessment may be, the fact remains:

Iran does not have the right to "participate in the arms race" and it will be bombed.
 
Back
Top Bottom