y doesnt america attack N Korea.....they have admitted to WMD....is it because there is no oil or is US scared

Question

shame.....poor peanut......looks like u missed all buses today

Answer 1

There are a fwe reasons, the first being that if you attack a rogue government which has Nuclear weapons, then at some point to protect their existence there is a high chance of them using them. Nuclear was is not good for anywone (anywhere in the world).

Is it right to attack a country simply for pocessing nuclear weapons when so many other countries have already developed them, and NK or only following suite?

If the US did attack NK, it would be the US who are the biggest threat since they seem to use military force often when it suits them, NK haven't invaded anyone or cause conflicts. the only reason NK are on the axis if evil, but other countries with nuclear capabilties such as India, Pakistan, Israel is becuase NK don't play ball with the US.

I really don't want any country to have nuclear weapons, nevermind more countries having them. But military action should be a very last resort, and even then the decision to use WMD would be ethically wrong.

My question is... why didn't the US intervene earlier? North Korea was named on the "axis of evil" immediately after 9/11. North Korea admitted developing nuclear weapons. Iraq and Iran denied developing them, but on a hunch they decided to invade Iraq (which has now been proven false) and now they're pointing their finger at Iran. Why didn't they invade/prevent North Korea who actually admitted WMD?

Probably becuase there were no natural resources to exploit and China wouldn't allow the US to adopt the same approach they did in Iraq.

Answer 2

that is a very good question. I live in the US and wonder that myself. I did not vote for Bush and don't care for his policy. I would like for him to do something about this REAL threat to the US and the world. This Norht Korea theing has been going on since the begining of the war with Iraq. When the US declared war on Sadam, Norht Korea was refusing any UN representatives to survey and look at facilities. I think some country should step up and do somehting.

Answer 3

well i wouldn't say that the US is afraid like it could be defeated or anything but the US definitly is fearful to launch itself in a situation like that. First of all, once you set a finger on north korea you cannot stop for a second hitting the with tactical missiles until u know u have obliterated their nuclear launch cappabilities.
Second, North Korth has an 1 million + member army. Thats the fifth largest standing army in the world

Answer 4

that's humorous in a hack sort of way, yet in answer on your question, no. A good center east could have been a extra effective oil procurement coverage by way of fact it may save danger to the provision lines down, save hypothesis down, and not value the U. S. one among those dramatic volume of funds, time, and political clout. US efforts in Iraq have definitely served to destabilize the middle East ordinarily, a minimum of on the instant, inflicting the rises in oil expenditures that we've been seeing for numerous years. that's by way of fact the political concern is unclear, the provision lines could be endangered at any time, and hypothesis, for this reason, went for the period of the roof. The "conflict for oil" prospect would not make lots monetary experience, ultimately; the quantity of funds positioned into the conflict attempt and the part outcomes it created do not sq. with a source conflict theory. there is an further rationalization that US leaders have been using the conflict in a conspiratorial way, to generate earnings for their ex-corporation companions in the oil industry. That rationalization demands one to bypass to somewhat extreme allegations on spurious information. on an identical time because it squares properly with a traditionally Radical attitude, there is not in all probability sufficient information to assist that end very solidly. that's totally in all probability that there have been reasons, or a reason, different than oil earnings that led to the U. S. to bypass to conflict with Iraq.

Answer 5

Omg clearly you havent been up to date with the IRAQ war going on. so umm its obivious we aren't going to fight N.korea ; 1. we dont have enough soldiers. 2.How do u expect half of the U.S. Armies to be in iraq. And a another batch in N.Korea? And the us isnt scared. Lol. O ya cracka? i didnt miss my bus today and for ur comment. Bus my ***

Answer 6

Neither. The US is too far stretched out to handle alone. NK have pissed off everybody this time... so it is good policy to wait for others to make the first move.

Answer 7

Why should we, the US, be the only ones to deal with North Korea??? Asia should deal with them. Japan, China, South Korea, etc. They are just posturing anyway. Il is ill, a mad man. I think the citizens of North Korea should deal with him.

Answer 8

Why is it that every time I see a particularly aggravating question in this topic area, it is usually one of three people trying to work up anger and discontent... and one of them is you? I agree with Patrickmcc...missed the school bus this morning, huh?

Answer 9

Ummmm, do you think Bush woke up one morning and said "Let's invade Iraq this afternoon." Nope, the invasion came only after years of trying every other means, the U.N., sanctions, etc. North Korea will be dealt with in due course. Would the U.S. rather have a multi-national force with them? Yes. Everything has to take it's course. As far as afraid...... I wouldn't bet on it. lol.

Answer 10

Missed the short bus to school this morning, didnt ya?