And we're all so worked up about Iran?

[PLATO]

That would be an extremely dangerous assumption to make. MAD works because everyone knows that launching nukes means your own destruction. The idea of one country doing it and getting away with it would be opening pandoras box.

This works to DPRK's advantage in nuclear posturing imo. I think the same as you on this issue. China can ill afford to have U.S. using nukes in Asia against their "client state" (I know you will love that cold war reference! )

[snoopy369]

That would be an extremely dangerous assumption to make. MAD works because everyone knows that launching nukes means your own destruction. The idea of one country doing it and getting away with it would be opening pandoras box.

North Korea isn't a MAD state, though. MAD works because China knows launching on the US will provoke a retaliation. If North Korea makes a sufficiently credible threat to preemptively nuke the US, the US would be justified in preempting North Korea. It all comes down to whether China decides North Korea is worth it as an ally - if they really feel they are, then sure.

I don't believe the US is likely to nuke anyone, by the way; just that if they did for some valid reason, China wouldn't retaliate.

[kentonio]

North Korea isn't a MAD state, though. MAD works because China knows launching on the US will provoke a retaliation. If North Korea makes a sufficiently credible threat to preemptively nuke the US, the US would be justified in preempting North Korea. It all comes down to whether China decides North Korea is worth it as an ally - if they really feel they are, then sure.

I don't believe the US is likely to nuke anyone, by the way; just that if they did for some valid reason, China wouldn't retaliate.

I come back to my previous question then, would you expect the US to sit back and watch if Russia or China nuked Canada because they felt they had a valid reason?

[snoopy369]

Canada is a legitimate ally, not a rogue state run by a psychopathic leader and his psychopathic family. Sure, if China nuked Canada we'd retaliate, because we'd consider it an attack on a US ally that's an asset and not provoking a response.

But if Steven Harper went off his meds and credibly threatened to nuke China? I don't know what we'd do, but I think if the response was sufficiently limited (say, a single nuke aimed at the nuclear plant or missile silo or whatever) it would not justify a MAD retaliation.

Israel is probably a better example, if you really want to get into it; they're much closer to NK in terms of being rather aggressive and likely to provoke a response. Israel as it stands now isn't a crazed rogue state; but if that were to change, the US is more likely to wash our hands of it than defend them. If the Israeli army suddenly invaded Egypt or Iran [somehow] or something (not just a little attack on a nuclear test facility, but full scale war) I don't imagine the US being full bore behind them anymore.

[kentonio]

Canada is a legitimate ally, not a rogue state run by a psychopathic leader and his psychopathic family. Sure, if China nuked Canada we'd retaliate, because we'd consider it an attack on a US ally that's an asset and not provoking a response.

But if Steven Harper went off his meds and credibly threatened to nuke China? I don't know what we'd do, but I think if the response was sufficiently limited (say, a single nuke aimed at the nuclear plant or missile silo or whatever) it would not justify a MAD retaliation.

Israel is probably a better example, if you really want to get into it; they're much closer to NK in terms of being rather aggressive and likely to provoke a response. Israel as it stands now isn't a crazed rogue state; but if that were to change, the US is more likely to wash our hands of it than defend them. If the Israeli army suddenly invaded Egypt or Iran [somehow] or something (not just a little attack on a nuclear test facility, but full scale war) I don't imagine the US being full bore behind them anymore.

The point I'm trying to make (in a laboured way I know) is that it's not relevant how we view North Korea, it's only relevant how China view North Korea. There's also the geographical issues of course, nuking someone right on China's doorstep would be likely seen as a huge challenge to their sphere of influence and a massive provocation. You may recall China invading North Korea to help drive back the US at a time when the US was a nuclear power and China was not, despite it costing them a million men to do so. Assuming that they'd just sit back and watch someone nuke their pet is just not a safe assumption to make.

[snoopy369]

I completely agree that it's how China views NK. My point is that I don't believe they view NK as a useful ally anymore; if they did, they'd be doing a lot more in the UNSC meetings (like vetoing sanctions).

China 1950s is definitely not China 2010s. China 1950s needed to prove themselves a significant power in the hemisphere. Nobody nowadays is suggesting they're not a significant power. They still have to vocally support NK at least up to a point, and certainly they'll continue the nuke threat indefinitely; but if we actually did nuke NK for good reason (again, not tomorrow, but if we could show China evidence of an impending NK launch on US soil) they would not force the issue further.

[onodera]

I consider using nukes to be a crime against civilian population. You can easily use cruise missiles or whatever conventional weapons the nearest US fleet has to destroy DPRK military and the ruling elite.

[Hauldren Collider]

You guys are making assumptions about what I meant. We have lots of ways of turning NK into a parking lot that don't involve nukes. If they did nuke us (unlikely), we would flatten them, maybe with nukes, maybe not, doesn't matter. They would cease to exist. If they invaded the south, they'd get slaughtered like animals by the South's vastly superior military.

And if North Korea nuked us, there's absolutely no ****ing way China would stick with them.

And Israel would only ever use its nukes if it was in imminent danger of being completely overrun or as a second-strike if an Arab country were to nuke them. Considering how awesome the IDF is and how terrible the Arab armies are, and how Pakistan is the only Muslim country with nukes and they're saving theirs for India, none of those things are gonna happen.

[snoopy369]

You need to work on reading comprehension, HC. I said that if they became a crazed rogue state and..., not suggesting it was actually going to happen.

Agree totally that we could eliminate NK as a threat if we chose to. China would still have to not participate, of course; that's actually the riskier issue, as in a nonnuclear confrontation they might send troops.

Onodera, I don't think many people would disagree with you; but if it's a binary choice - nuke them or be nuked - it's rather hard to choose the latter. If they shield their nuclear silos well, you might need a nuke to get down there. I don't think the US would nuke the capital and kill hundreds of thousands of people; but there would undoubtedly be collateral damage.

[Elok]

For the record, I'm not at all worked up about Iran. Just FYI.

(or NK, for that matter)

[MichaeltheGreat]

They don't yet have the capability of nuking anyone. I doubt that Kimmy's really in charge - he's purged a few of daddy's buddies, but he is still institutionally beholden to the military and secret police apparatus collectively, if not to specific individuals. He can't run the risk of alienating the institutions that keep in place. A lot of the current idiocy is the young pup trying to prove he's tough enough to be alpha dawg.

China's irritation with their rabid Chihuahua is that Kimmy and his handlers know China wants the DPRK as a buffer, rather than dealing with a unified RoK, so he thinks he can jump down and shred the postman's socks any time he wants. China has absolute control - the PRC can cut off fuel supplies and bring the DPRK to their collective knees any time it wants. The Chinese don't want to have to do that because they more than anyone realize how fragile the DPRK house of cards is and they could end up with a significant geopolitical threat on their doorstep via reunification or simple collapse and a flood of refugees. China also doesn't want a war, because their stability and economic interest are at risk. So all they do at this point is say "bad dog, BAD, no treat for you."

[PLATO]

They don't yet have the capability of nuking anyone. I doubt that Kimmy's really in charge - he's purged a few of daddy's buddies, but he is still institutionally beholden to the military and secret police apparatus collectively, if not to specific individuals. He can't run the risk of alienating the institutions that keep in place. A lot of the current idiocy is the young pup trying to prove he's tough enough to be alpha dawg.

China's irritation with their rabid Chihuahua is that Kimmy and his handlers know China wants the DPRK as a buffer, rather than dealing with a unified RoK, so he thinks he can jump down and shred the postman's socks any time he wants. China has absolute control - the PRC can cut off fuel supplies and bring the DPRK to their collective knees any time it wants. The Chinese don't want to have to do that because they more than anyone realize how fragile the DPRK house of cards is and they could end up with a significant geopolitical threat on their doorstep via reunification or simple collapse and a flood of refugees. China also doesn't want a war, because their stability and economic interest are at risk. So all they do at this point is say "bad dog, BAD, no treat for you."

I think that sums it up nicely actually. Does bring the question though...Who is the person actually making decisions? or Who are the group of people actually making decisions?

[Sparrowhawk]

I think the opening post (and thread title) take a little liberty in stating "we're all so worked up about Iran". I for one am equally worked up about Iran, Chile, Iraq, Afghanistan, Sri Lanka, Zaire, North Korea, Switzerland, and most other countries.

Which is to say, not at all (about any of the above).

If you want to worry about a country starting World War III, perhaps the best place to look is in the mirror.

[giblets]

I always knew Canada was up to something.

[MichaeltheGreat]

The true function of the Keystone pipeline isn't oil sands oil, it's to infiltrate fluoridated water into our water supply.