Would you agree on a pre-emptive strike against North Korea?

[VGPolyglot]

AbbathTheGrim said:

VGPolyglot said:
1. No, because the threat is greatly exaggerated, it will involve a lot of innocent deaths, and the United States would be doing it with their own interests in mind rather than out of pure benevolence.

2. I highly doubt this will happen, as North Korea would lose their deterrence, as they'd be showing that they'll attack either way. If North Korea strikes first, they'll get destroyed, end of story.

The thing though is that nobody knows exactly what NK's Kim wants, but some of the previous demands from NK are that the US leaves the region and that NK wants an unified Korea.

If de-escalating the situation is entering negotiations that lead the US to leave there, nothing is stopping NK from threatening an invasion of the South by menace of nuclear warfare.

I am all up for negotations that will make this Kim guy happy and stop with the threats, but if what he wants is for the US to disappear from the region and gain power there and maybe even allow China to have more power there, that would be bad for our allies and I doubt the US will agree to any of it.

So I suppose the only answer would be to not do anything, get used to threats and hope for the best.

What North Korean officials want is for the regime to survive. They want to make threats, then have negotiations that will try to ensure that. They don't want a war that will surely end them.