Should the U.S. invade N. Korea and nuke them back to the Stone Age?

Answer 1

"Should N.Korea invade U.S n nuke them off to the stone Age"
wht abt this? excuse me America is not a police man for the whole world....right!!! it should keep its own business n should not wander about other affairs.....it is already messing up with Afghanistan n Iraq....why u r not thinking of those innocent people living in N.korea.........How mean u americans are btw... :S

Answer 2

Hmm lets have a look at both parts of this question then shall we?

"Should the U.S. invade N. Korea"
Even if they wanted to they are probably too fully committed elsewhere in the world to commit sufficent manpower and firepower to support such a mission.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_of_North_Korea

According to western estimates, North Korea has the fifth-largest military in the world [1], with the largest percentage of citizens enlisted (49.03 active troops per thousand citizens). The North has an estimated 1.08 million armed personnel, compared to about 686,000 South Korean troops, plus 17,000 US troops in South Korea. Military spending is estimated at 20%-25% of GNP, which would mean that the DPRK spends the largest proportion of its GNP on its military in the world. Roughly 20% of North Korean men between the ages of 17 and 54 serve in the regular armed forces. As a result, DPRK forces are thought to have a substantial numerical advantage over the South (as high as 3 to 1) in several key categories of offensive weapons like tanks, long-range artillery, and Armoured personnel carriers.

So to invade N.Korea to supposedly effect a regime change such as there still fighting for in Iraq and Afghanistan would be bordering on suicidal.

"nuke them back to the Stone Age?"
Given that the western world is currently condemning the alleged test use of a device that may not even be viable as a weapon we would be opening a pandoras box that cannot be easily closed.
The Chinese would not stand idlely by to see there neighbours cities being vaporised.
I doubt that the Russians would just turn there backs on the situation either.
What I think you may fail to realise is that a strategic nuclear weapon is more a political weapon than one that holds a tangible military use.
The value of these weapons is in there non-usage. Once you have launched a ICBM there is no turning back, there would only be a protracted escalation of force and megadeth for all participants, willing or otherwise.
By maintaining a credible nuclear deterrent you give the surety that all players in a strategic nuclear conflict will lose, and lose massively.

In my opinion, probably the best way of dealing with the problem would be to get the country on its knees through economic and diplomatic pressure. Although it could be argued that this could be seen just as dangerous as a full blown war. For example if North Korea collapsed due to a failed national ecomony and being unable to feed its people would South Korea be able to cope with the millions of immigrants seeking refuge?

Answer 3

Should morons be allowed to post questions?

The problem with north korea is one man and his stalinist government. The rest of north korea suffers under his leadership. You think they should be nuked? there are hundreds of thousands of north koreans in concentration -like camps simply because they didnt fit in with the workers parties ideals, or even becuase they are related to someone who has committed a crime against the state. There is a rule in north Korea that if a person is found guilty of a crime against the state (even a trumped up one), their kids and the kids' kids are sent to prison camps. In these camps, people are tortured on a regular basis, and in some camps, prisoners are used for chemical and biological weapons experiments. Maybe we should invade north korea and free these poor people (though this would be alot more difficult that iraq due to North koreas milliatary power and possesion of nuclear arms), but to nule to who country to the stone age?

Should the rest of the world nuke america just becuase george bush is a power hungry oil grabbing idiot?

Also, in case you forgot, there are consequences to nuclear war, radioactive fallout being the main one. The results woul be seen for generations to come.

Answer 4

If you ever get to see film smuggled out of N. Korea showing the real people, you will see that they aren't far from the stone age now.

Answer 5

Dude, you're totally channeling General Curtis Lemay.

Answer 6

not invade them, why should we go there, just bomb them back to the stone age, then if the south koreans feel like it let them go in

Answer 7

Why is it that Americans think that it's ok for America to be hypritical. We want N. Korea to not make nuclear weapons because they might use them. So we should use ours to show them how wrong it is?

Answer 8

Because we have too many trade greements with"Communist" China. They've got us over the barrel. Thanks, George H. W. Bush, Bill Clinton, and George W. Bush.

Answer 9

wow what a question...there are innocent people there. Just because their leader is coocoo bananas doesn't mean we should kill the whole lot of em...just look at George W. Bush. Americans aren't crazy even though the president is...

Answer 10

No, we are supposed to be a CIVILIZED nation. Or maybe you're not into civilization?