I don't think he would hesitate using his nuclear weapons if he thought his reign was threaten. But I don't think he would use them in a first strike.

Which is why I think the US, and other nations, should ratchet down the rhetoric a bit.

You're sure giving this guy a lot of credit for being reasonable and sane.

Well I think it's more than obvious that a first strike with a nuclear weapon during peace time would be the most horrifying thing mankind would ever witness.

I don't think he's stupid enough to ignore that his reign and his own person would be totally annihilated within minutes or very few hours at best following this act.

I think his military leaders are not stupid enough to ignore all the arsenal the U.S. and their allies have:

Nuclear warhead thrown from everywhere: planes, ships & submarines, ICBM, maybe satellites (even if prohibited) and that's without other means we ignore...

The U.S. still has by far the best military technology whether it is reconnaissance satellites, missiles that are capable of delivering an underground nuclear strike, all kind of spies systems, data processing means, etc.

My personal belief is that he's doing this as a power demonstration over his people and to show (everything is about appearance here) that he could handle any threat.

But he knows (at least his close advisors know) that it wouldn't take long before being completely annihilated in a full scale total war.

Seems this maybe different than assumed:

A new study by a Harvard University-led team has shed some light on the underlying causes of psychopathy. Explaining their findings in the journal Neuron, these researchers describe how they uncovered the neurological “wiring” that makes psychopaths so impulsive and sometimes dangerously reckless. *Although it’s previously been assumed that it’s their lack of empathy that engenders reckless choices and actions, this team have concluded that it’s the appeal of the short-term reward that’s really motivating their decisions.
“Because it's the choices of psychopaths that cause so much trouble, we've been trying to understand what goes on in their brains when they make decisions that involve trade-offs between the costs and benefits of action,” senior author Josh Buckholtz, an associate professor of psychology, said in a statement.

The more impulsive and thus more psychopathic individuals required gratification far sooner, as expected. Individuals with high psychopathy scores showed greater activity in the region of the brain associated with immediate reward.

http://www.cell.com/neuron/fulltext/...showall%3Dtrue
https://www.eurekalert.org/pub_relea...-ppb070317.php

* This somehow reminds me of uh oh

Explicit warnings are not an option; lies are optional
 

I have no clue, I am not inside his head.

Point is: I do not want to leave him the option to have me/us finding out at my/our/America's cost.

There is also another threat, and it already has materialised: nuclear proliferation.

---

Media say that Russia has had a strong hand in delivering the missile now to NK, at least major, decisive parts for it. All by itself NK would not be where it is. Its stuff like this why I say since many years it is stupid to bully the Russians and demand them to always play ball by our rules we set up for them. What we see in Northkorea is their way to return the favours we did them.

I dont know that study, and I am no more active in psychology anyway, but the older understanding I explained and this claim now must not be mutually exclusive, saying that after just this first glance.

But one would need to study that study and elaborate its methodologic basis before one can form an opinion on it. And to do that I am not interested enough anymore. But still thanks for bringing this study up.

The leader of North Korea is the problem ... the people are innocent.

Why nuke a whole country to take out one leader ... let the normal train of thoughts in someones head that to take out Kim Jong-Un is better than wiping out an entire innocent population, not to mention that after the war we would have to offer food, medical-aid and counseling to millions of people in both the North and the South. If the USA would make a first strike we lose the support of the rest of the world, who already blame us for being the police of the world we live in.

Did you know that North Korea has been led to believe that we aren’t in the year 2015 right now, but actually in year 103 ... North Koreans are made to believe they should count year 1 as the year Kim Il Sung was born.

Ten Most Ridiculous Lies North Koreans Are Made To Believe

10. The U.S. Started The Korean War

9. Kim Jong-Il Had A Supernatural Birth

8. Kim Jong-il Is A Fashion Icon

7. Kim Jong-Il Is Loved And North Korea Is Envied All Over The World

6. Kim Jong-Il Invented The Hamburger

5. Kim Jong-Il Is The Best Natural Golfer & Bowler In The World

4. Kim Jong-Il Is Magical

3. Kim Jong-Il Cured Dwarfism

2. Kim Jong-Il Was Extraordinarily Gifted

1. Internet Access Is Not Allowed To Protect The West

http://www.therichest.com/rich-list/...de-to-believe/

What makes you beleve that assassination has not already been tried?

Of course it has been tried. Problem is the target is pretty much out of reach, apparently.

Also, the officer corps. They have much too lose, have priviliges that they would most likely lose in any new order without a strong dictator.

Next, you said it yourself, the population is heavily brainwashed. Take out the leader, and many still would continue to believe, and would be willing to fight.

All that must not be our concern, however. Our concern only is to destroy nuclear weapons with a range that they pose a threat to us. Doing that is like trying to stroke an angry rattlesnake. Thats why you better take these weapons out before they get the legs to reach us.

Taking them out it seems will be a dirty job, and that is why nobody wants it.

Other than citing an entertainment website, how exactly do you know what the North Koreans believe?

Most of our "news" about North Korea comes from South Korea...not exact an unbiased source.

I have not seen any evidence that he is insane.

He is ruthless, cruel, selfish, uncaring of the people in his domination of the country. He routinely does things that are abhorrent to our culture.

He is an all around scumbag and probably not a nice guy.

I think that North Korea, and to a small extent the world would be a better place without him.

But what has he done that would indicate that he is insane?

I guess that would depend on how one chooses to define insanity.

In the US legal system insanity is often defined as

'Insanity is a mental illness of such a severe nature that a person cannot distinguish fantasy from reality, cannot manage his/her own affairs, or is subject to uncontrollable impulsive behavior."

Using this definition (which really does not apply to North Korea but let's go with it) KJU is not insane

KJU can tell the difference between reality and fantasy. His may think that people are out to get him for the very good reason that they probably are.

KJU seems to be able to manage his own affairs. He seems to live a pretty good life.

KJU may appear to act impulsively, but his actions may, in fact, be very well thought out. I don't think he has ever accidentally killed anyone... it is deliberate!

But one thing that seems clear is that KJU has a high sense of self-preservation. He is not some religious nutter willing to die for a higher cause. He likes living and he enjoys his creature comforts.

While I have no problem believing that he will gladly sacrifice any number of his people casually, I doubt that he will be so casual with sacrificing his own life.

Dictator type leaders tend to like living.

Thanks, this was really interesting and arousing at the same time. Certainly it is Russia Today, but.. it's not all wrong just because of that.

The usual argument for dropping the bombs is to spare american soldiers' lives, because it shortened the war, no invasion of the japanese mainland and so forth. This of course worked, Japan was already finished and it would have taken more time and a lot of suffering on both sides.

But being civilized and all that, and then killing a hundred thousand civilians in big cities with those two bombs (and why two?), let alone the genetic aftermath.. may the reason be shortening the war or threatening Russia.. you really have to win a war to get through with that. Having "the bomb" of course helps..
Different times, different mindsets, propaganda, Japan perpetrating atrocities. Still I wonder if i were japanese, whether i would ever forgive. The Japanese seems to have forgiven it though. How is that seen nowadays, in the USA? :hmmm:

If you're really arguing that using nuclear weapons on North Korea would be a good idea, or worth a thought at all, please stop, take a step back, and think again.
Seriously.

This is so wrong on so many levels, I am uncertain where to begin, but how about:
- Fallout will not only affect NK, it will affect China and/or Russia too.
And how will these countries react to some western country causing this?

- The people are innocent. Brainwashed or not. You could also say we should nuke the US or ourselves, for we are just as brainwashed - only in a different way, the "better way". Let's not pretend we are worth more than any North Korean farmer who just tries to keep his family alive and out of trouble, just because we have iPhones and Starbucks.

- The exact nuclear capabilities of Kim aren't known (to us at least).
If some are indeed ready, and protected by being stationed underground, well than no nuke in the world will prevent these from flying, and personally I do not feel lucky enough today to rely on the missile-defense systems around. They will likely work. But Jesus... what if they will not?
Tough luck, butter cup? :o


Yes, Kim has to go, has to be stopped - by whatever means, but as soon as you start to willingly nuke non combatants, what does that say about you? How is Kim splitting prisoners with heavy machine guns in half worse than someone willingly ending millions of lives?

We got a glimpse of what nukes are capable of in 1945.
The Japanese are still suffering, one way or another, from the consequences. And these nukes were tiny, compared to what is available today.


The day the west commits any form of nuclear first strike, it lost every right to exist itself.

There were two types of atomic bombs, both untested: an uran-bomb, and a plutonium bomb. And both were wanted to be tested under "real" cinditions, over real targets, since one wanted to know what they could do and to what degree they were different.

Thats how I see it.

Obviously a running war i which the enemy still has not surrendered, is the time and place to run such "real" weapon tests.

Because that is the decisive detial: Japan still had not surrendered when the attack on Nagasaki took place. Whether it was in shock and paralysed, wanted to surrender, wanted to hold out, wanted to save its emperor, wanted this or intended that - thats all speculation. The war was still running. A declaration of surrender had not reached the US. Japan had not given up at the time of Nagasaki's destruction. They better should have hurried more, if after Hiroshima they wated to capitulate anyway. Note the word "if". If the second bomb would have been dropped after a declaration of surrender had reached the Americans, it obviously would have been a war crime then.

:doh: but :yep: