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

[DonFerrari]

Wyrdness said:

DonFerrari said:

SO I'm moving the goal post because you didn't even understood my point? gotcha.

You never made one to begin with you just claimed history will say otherwise because of eras gone by but unfortunately the past isn't a guarantee of something repeating as eras change drastically, either way you were debunked then began adding more stipulations on what constitute being judged.

Where have I said History? I said that the loser is considered the criminal, for that there have to be a trial. You imagined things I didn't said and argueed it.

Lucas-Rio said:

DonFerrari said:

SO I'm moving the goal post because you didn't even understood my point? gotcha.

It isn't the usual route to do test with nuclear weaponry passing over the country.

Am I right to suppose you are a brazilian left wing?

You are completely wrong. First I am from EU and then I am not left wing.

North Korea secures itself from any american intervention. Iraq and Libya gave up their nuclear program and both ended up destroyed by the USA.

Nuclear weapons are from deterrence. The USA won't dare to invade North Korea if North Korea can retaliate strongly. The US bully is made powerless by NK self defense weapons.

EU (Europe Union?) ok. Because your nickname having RIo seemed very USA and your position on USA being like the imperialistic overlords is what our left wing does.

And what have secured NK from previous invasions that weren't nuclear weapons? Venezuela or Cuba? Brazil?

You don't need nuclear weapon to avoid being invaded as long as you aren't a dictatorship throwing tantrums.

Several countries without nuclear weapons weren't invaded by USA.

So US is the one bullying NK? ok.

Soundwave said:

A few things I think some people don't understand. 

1.) Seoul is a 40 minute drive from the North Korean border. We're not even talking like 3 hours apart (driving distance) here. North Korea has conventional weapons that would level the city within minutes. 

2.) Even for the "Dumb American" trope person who doesn't care about Korean lives lost ... you do realize there are like 50,000 Americans in in the area right, most living in Seoul. The death toll for American civilians in such an attack could likely be more than 9/11 and Pearl Harbor combined. Think about that for a second. 

3.) Seoul is not just "kind of  big city". It's the 3rd or 4th largest city in the world population wise, it's basically like New York City. Imagine trying to evacuate a city the size of New York in 20-30 minutes. 

I don't really see a military solution here, IMO the world community is probably going to have to accept North Korea and offer them incentives to stop being hostile. 

People were so quick to snap at Obama for the Iran-Nuclear deal, but it seems to me like looking at it now that deal was a very, very good one as it prevented a situation as we have in NK now before it got out of control by incentivizing Iran peacefully to cease their nuclear ambitions in exchange for strong economic incentives. 

Yelling at North Korea and trying to intimidate them doesn't work IMO, the only message that sends to them is that they need to accelerate their nuclear plans because they need that to protect the regime. 

Sorry but deals on this scale is like making deals with terrorist which USA swear they don't do, and deal or no deal they can certainly keep doing research in more seclutive ways.