North Korea = first use of nuclear weapons since 1945 unless Kim Jung Il grows up real fast.
His threats toward Japan may be his undoing. He's only lasted this long because Clinton and "W" stupidly have tried to bribe him.
2006-10-08 23:47:59
·
answer #1
·
answered by urbancoyote 7
·
2⤊
1⤋
No. North Korea can no longer furnish their nukes, assuming they have them, and that they in trouble-free words have approximately 3. whether, a pair of million,000,000 human beings on the Korean peninsula might die in extremely short order. If China did no longer intrude, the U. S. and South Korea might mop up the North in some weeks, yet there will be catastrophic harm to Seoul. some thousand US troops might probable die. North Korea might in all threat no longer use nuclear weapons. this is going to likely be very grim actual. i've got not got self theory China could intrude in time, yet while we've a buildup or some such element, that would opt to alter. additionally, China could take the prospect to attack Taiwan. whether - this will possibly no longer take place, through fact the China X-element suited here is too a lot of an unknown, the preliminary value in lives in Korea would be surprising, and the aftermath of the North Korean humanitarian catastrophe that would opt to consequence might weigh down help efforts. North Korea have not got weapons everywhere on the factor of the equivalent of South Korea, plenty much less u . s . of united statesa..
2016-12-08 11:22:27
·
answer #2
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
No. North Korea does not mean the end of the world. why whould it be? We can defeat North Korea if us south koreans rushed will the U.S. people here. And I don't think china would help now that North Korea did a nuclear test down here in South korea.
2006-10-08 23:53:30
·
answer #3
·
answered by 지태영 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
No! I don't think so, North Korea have nuclear capabilities that is a fact, but I doubt they would have a delivery system sophisticated enough to deliver a missile over a great distance. A nuclear devise for a missile is very compact and extremely hard to configure a unit small enough for a missile. An atomic device on a tower is a different proposition, easier to design, and much larger overall.
2006-10-09 00:02:40
·
answer #4
·
answered by wheeliebin 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
I wonder why the US government takes such a thoughtful and badly wise stance concerning North Korea's nuclear arsenal, while being so tense and irritated to Iran's nuclear program. All WMD must be rejected no matter who have them. Thank you Russia for all this mess.
2006-10-09 01:04:01
·
answer #5
·
answered by Master 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
I personally think that this is a difficult question. We could all say that it is not the end of the world because of the countries status in comparisson to other nations. However, do we really know what goes on behind closed doors and the capabilities of such nations? The US and UK are guilty of thinking they are untouchable, but someone out there may surprise them one day! I hope this never happens but I think we need to be more vigulent.
2006-10-09 00:10:29
·
answer #6
·
answered by Mizzy 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
Marrk my word and this answer! North Korea = end of the present dictator.
2006-10-08 23:53:04
·
answer #7
·
answered by Tom Cat 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
A wise man once said,
"I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones."
Albert Einstein.
Have fun but be safe!
2006-10-08 23:49:15
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
no, lets not over play things.Kim Jong-il is, lets say a little off. But no he is not going to send nucks this way. Many countrys have then. Why does everyone think just caues' some one WE dont like is going to use them. the neo-cons are the ones to fear, not a leader of any other place....
2006-10-09 00:22:43
·
answer #9
·
answered by jjayflash9 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
Now the Korians got the H bomb and so do the Isrealis. Why not let them fight it out and we'll get rid of two lots of useless mofos.
2006-10-09 00:17:25
·
answer #10
·
answered by Little Mark 2
·
1⤊
0⤋