Would You Support Nuclear Retaliation on North Korea?

Question

If the DPRK attacks its neighbor, Japan, or the United States with a nuclear weapon, would you (Americans) support a retalitation in kind? It's long been the policy of the United States to respond in kind, but would the American public support it if Seoul, Tokyo, or Honolulu were hit with such a weapon?

Answer 1

Definitely. If North Korea uses a weapon in that way it should become an example to every would be rouge state in the world. Every strong man trying to control his own people and impress his will on the rest of the world wants to develop his own variant of a half century old bomb. We have a lot more and one American nuclear missile sub could take out most of North Korea. I would use one. And say to Iran, next?

Answer 2

lol. The funy thingis that people think North Korea is like Japan.
They think that 2 nukes will stop them and it is all over. That is the most idiotic thought ever. North Korea does not care for its people. They won't sign a litle document and say "you won you own our country". Just because Japan cared or their people
does not mean that North Korea would do the same. They
will fight until the last man.The last time they dared the U.S to drop a nuke. They want that. It would motivate the North Korean people to hate America. Then once the North Lorean military is defeated rebels and insurgents would spread everwhere.
Somehow America thinks that war is this board game and when it is check mate (a nuclear bomb) the remaining pawns and
bishops (soldeirs) will not attack. They have learned from the U.S they know that defeat is certain. They know that they are no match for the nuclear bombs and the stealth bombers. But
once they are defeated everyone including remaining soldeirs will fight the U.S and cause as much havoc as possible. They will
fight gurrilla style. It would turn out like Iraq exept worse since the milita and strageling military forces would be better equiped and trained. A nuclear bomb will not work. Kim Jong Il has said that
a he will not accept defeat until he has taken as much of the world as possible with him. War with North Korea should be reconsidered. Then the U.S would have to learn the hard way
and I American people learn that a war is not a board game when a nuclear attack is the end.

Answer 3

There are 870 million Americans, only 300 million United Statesians, although most United Statesians would support retaliation in kind, most Americans would condemn the use of nuclear force.

This is not 1945, and the US can not survive without the resources of America, the last thing we want to do is piss off most Americans.

Answer 4

People apparantly does not understand nuclear fallout. This travels around the globe. It will come back to kick us in the face. Please do not think of such a thing. I am from the USA, this is the very reason that the USA is trying to keep the nukes from the hands of madmen. The USA has enough conventional weaponry that a nuke would not ever have to be touched. Besides that the bomb would never hit its target.

Answer 5

Yes I do, but the problem with your question is the US Military is fighting there butts off, but the American people are so weak that they have no clue what it's like to fight for freedom. The Liberal press has them confused. Also the UN and the rest of the Pussy countries sit back and expect America to handle it. I spent 30 years in the US Marines fighting for the world and have come to a conclusion, We can continue to fight but we need support from the UN and the rest of the world. Which we will never get because you bleeding hearts will never get it.

Answer 6

That is a difficult question. Nuclear retaliation would be justified but it may not be the best course of action.

If we had reason to believe they were going to use another nuclear weapon, then it would not only be justified, but our moral responsibility to stop them, and if the only way to do that was with nuclear weapons, then that is what we would have to do.

On the other hand, if we could contain the situation with a conventional force, then that would be the best route.

Answer 7

Doesn't matter whether you support it or not - if it's necessary, it will be done - regardless of public outrage or the debates that will follow. Your Secretary of State has already commented that the US military stands ready to respond with the full, and she stressed the "full" range of responses available to it. Regardless of whether it is "supported" or not. I think you overestimate the capacity of public opinion to influence strategic decision-making. A way will be found to stuff marshmallows into the mouths of those who would protest. There's nothing like an imminent threat to your own backside to swing the pacifists to outrage.

Answer 8

We have enough conventional weapons to bomb NK into the Stone Age. It wouldn't be worth deystroying the enviorment over the Potbellied pig and North Korea.

Answer 9

All i got too say is if someone nukes japan then they are in for it. I would support nuking the hell out them and killing them all. Japan makes too many good video games and I would be pissed. The Japanees are too cool to be hurt like that. If they nuked china then they would be up **** creek anyways because china has the larges armed forces in the world. They would slaughter everything that moved in N. Korea. If they nuked south korea then I'de say bomb them to the stone age.

Answer 10

No nukes necessary, scuds and the rest of our precision artillary would do the job.. That would keep civilian casialties to a minimum... Plus we have the ability to shoot missiles out of the sky before they reach there targets...