North Korean Nuclear Test

[tMoon]

NK recently tested another nuclear weapon (their 5th overall test and their second in the last 8 months). What do you think of this?

Why the U.S 'should be increasingly worried' by Kim's nuclear tests


Also, if you're interested in joining an SFA conversation on NK and nuclear weapons, check it out!:
North Korean Nuclear Weapons

 

[Swaze]

"The likeliest threat, according to analysts, faces South Korean and Japan: Two U.S. allies."

Currently living in South Korea, and I have plans to live in Japan for a while in the future. Should I worry?

 

[Lame]

It's the end times.

 

[JSand]

"While impossible to verify"

Really?

They'll probably blow themselves up before they successfully perfect the missiles. They're posturing like they always do

 

[Jay]

North Korea wont start a war in our lifetime, they are far too behind. Media is there to scare you, to keep you interested. A Nuke doesn't mean they can launch it safely, or without retaliation. They are YEARS AND YEARS Behind anti-air defenses to start, and every country that NK doesn't like has top-notch air defenses their nuke would never land. and a retaliation would be them instantly getting nuked back, and they would have no way of stopping it with their pre cold war defense system.

 

[theArc]

If they attempted to nuke the U.S. the only thing the U.S. would have to worry about is the repercussions from nuking NK to the ground..or something like that

 

[SuF]

If they attempted to nuke the U.S. the only thing the U.S. would have to worry about is the repercussions from nuking NK to the ground..or something like that

If they are able to develop nukes that can fit on a missile and an ICBM, it is very likely that they would be able to strike the US without us being able to do anything about it.

 

[Aklan]

They're slowly advancing in their fire power and even if the threat doesn't seem to be there right now, it may well be here in a few decades. Hope heavy sanctions "slow down" their nuclear weapon developement program

 

[theArc]

If they are able to develop nukes that can fit on a missile and an ICBM, it is very likely that they would be able to strike the US without us being able to do anything about it.

Does the U.S. not have Nuke defense systems?

 

[SuF]

Does the U.S. not have Nuke defense systems?

We do but you are assuming it actually works. Stopping ICBMs is really hard so I would not assume that it would work.

 

[theArc]

We do but you are assuming it actually works. Stopping ICBMs is really hard so I would not assume that it would work.

Why would we have it if it didn't work? If a nuke were to land on U.S. soil all hell would break loose..tbh

 

[SuF]

Why would we have it if it didn't work? If a nuke were to land on U.S. soil all hell would break loose..tbh

Because people are scared of nukes and congress wants to show that they are doing something. The systems that shoot down nukes as they are launched have a much higher chance of working than ones that try to shoot it down while it is already in suborbital space or coming down on the US but that doesn't mean it guarantees it will work. But deploying these systems none the less worries other countries as it reduces the deterrence of their nukes so deploying them, even if they don't work very well, applies pressure to other countries so we have more leverage against them in diplomacy.

 

[theArc]

Because people are scared of nukes and congress wants to show that they are doing something. The systems that shoot down nukes as they are launched have a much higher chance of working than ones that try to shoot it down while it is already in suborbital space or coming down on the US but that doesn't mean it guarantees it will work. But deploying these systems none the less worries other countries as it reduces the deterrence of their nukes so deploying them, even if they don't work very well, applies pressure to other countries so we have more leverage against them in diplomacy.

I see what you mean, so it is more or less a scare tactic?

 

[SuF]

I see what you mean, so it is more or less a scare tactic?

It's to make the American people feel safer and to threaten foreign powers. Even if they only have a 5% success rate if you deploy a lot of them that could get up to 25% or more and suddenly Russia or China needs a lot more nukes to be at the same level of deterrence as the US is.

 

[SexayMistahBee]

"The likeliest threat, according to analysts, faces South Korean and Japan: Two U.S. allies."

Currently living in South Korea, and I have plans to live in Japan for a while in the future. Should I worry?

Nah

I'm currently serving in the Korean army, and we're really not worried about any nuclear attacks in the near future. Possession of nukes are a mainly a problem because it will give Kim Jongun leverage when negotiating with the US, not because they'll use it in war.

Of course it does mean that N.Korea can erase us from the map. But North Korea may have the upper hand for a bit during war, but it would eventually be lost. They are well aware of that.

Kim Jongun has personally got too much to lose by going to war so nope, no worries there..

 

[Mathewkthxbai]

Kim Jong-un ‘has enough uranium for 20 nukes THIS YEAR’ – as the South vows to ‘annihilate’ North Korea if he fires one more missile