4 ms·

"We really need to develop anti-ICBM tech to save the humanity." Maybe, but this is a very strange assessment of the NK situation. The obvious explanation is

"We really need to develop anti-ICBM tech to save the humanity." Maybe, but this is a very strange assessment of the NK situation. The obvious explanation is that the, in my opinion disgusting, NK regime is a rational actor that try to perpetuate itself in time. The only way to ensure that it's to avoid external interference. The only way to avoid external interference (Iraq style) is to have nuclear weapons. From this follow that they are not more eager to start a war that other nations. Probably less.

nindalf 9y ago
They have two goals, not one. The first is obviously self perpetuation, but the second is to flourish. The nukes give them the ability to blackmail their neighbours for everything they want and need, like food, money, weapons etc. I imagine Kim Jong Un will get a real kick out of getting South Korea and Japan to pay for all of his bills, even the concentration camps.
- RobertoG 9y ago
  I doubt very much this is the case. Suppose they ask for something to South Korea and they say "no way". What happens then? A war is suicide and they know it. I suppose you could extract a few sweets from things like "I will stop creating nuclear weapons" or something like this, but not serious blackmail is possible. It's just the old MAD (1) doctrine. We (the world) have a lot experience with that. As an European I'm used to the idea that my life is in the hands of some crazy guy in the Kremlin or the White House. (1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutual_assured_destruction https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutual_assured_destruction
  - jacquesm 9y ago
    MAD long term requires a world without accidents. I don't think the past 70 years and the number of near misses we've had should give anyone confidence that it will work long term.
    - RobertoG 9y ago
      Actually, if, as it's the case, there is any chance of something going wrong, maths tell us that it will not work long term.
      - jacquesm 9y ago
        That's my conclusion, and I really hope that if and when something does go wrong it will not lead to a chain reaction before the accident is recognized as such.
  - Freestyler_3 9y ago
    Didn't they(NK) already play that "we will stop our nuke program" card with the US and gotten some figure between 1 and 2 billion?
- mirekrusin 9y ago
  Doesn't advancing nuclear programme mean even more sanctions = less money?
- oh_sigh 9y ago
  Not really. Nukes prevent you from being invaded, they won't magically make everyone give you everything.
- malloryerik 9y ago
  They may still have the ultimate goal of reuniting the Korean Peninsula under their rule. It sounds crazy to us, but I'm not sure they've gotten the memo about war for territory being obsolete. Put yourself in the Pyongyang frame of mind, and at least the dream of taking "back" the south almost has to be alive. Edit: This dream of course might be second (or third) after regime survival.
  - kuschku 9y ago
    The war for territory is not obsolete yet, Israel and Russia are annexing more land from their neighbors every day.
    - dogma1138 9y ago
      Russia is annexing land primarily to to counter outside influences. People might not like it but Russia wasn't about to give up its only warm water port. Georgia wasn't a clear cut case either. Israel hasn't annexed any land since 1967.
      - kuschku 9y ago
        > Israel hasn't annexed any land since 1967. Except for the settlements, which are annexations in all but name.
        dogma1138 9y ago
        On land they de facto already control since 1967, they also haven't expanded settlements outside of Area C (they demolish "illegal" settlements in Area B all the time), which according to the Oslo accords is under Israeli control.
  - RobertoG 9y ago
    I have not doubt that the supreme leader of the DPKR would like to be the supreme leader of the planet Earth. We all have dreams, but what counts is the hard reality. I didn't get that memo neither, by the way ;-). I can't think a war that it's not, in its root causes, about territory.

nindalf 9y ago

They have two goals, not one. The first is obviously self perpetuation, but the second is to flourish. The nukes give them the ability to blackmail their neighbours for everything they want and need, like food, money, weapons etc. I imagine Kim Jong Un will get a real kick out of getting South Korea and Japan to pay for all of his bills, even the concentration camps.

RobertoG 9y ago
I doubt very much this is the case. Suppose they ask for something to South Korea and they say "no way". What happens then? A war is suicide and they know it. I suppose you could extract a few sweets from things like "I will stop creating nuclear weapons" or something like this, but not serious blackmail is possible. It's just the old MAD (1) doctrine. We (the world) have a lot experience with that. As an European I'm used to the idea that my life is in the hands of some crazy guy in the Kremlin or the White House. (1) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutual_assured_destruction https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutual_assured_destruction
- jacquesm 9y ago
  MAD long term requires a world without accidents. I don't think the past 70 years and the number of near misses we've had should give anyone confidence that it will work long term.
  - RobertoG 9y ago
    Actually, if, as it's the case, there is any chance of something going wrong, maths tell us that it will not work long term.
    - jacquesm 9y ago
      That's my conclusion, and I really hope that if and when something does go wrong it will not lead to a chain reaction before the accident is recognized as such.
- Freestyler_3 9y ago
  Didn't they(NK) already play that "we will stop our nuke program" card with the US and gotten some figure between 1 and 2 billion?
mirekrusin 9y ago
Doesn't advancing nuclear programme mean even more sanctions = less money?
oh_sigh 9y ago
Not really. Nukes prevent you from being invaded, they won't magically make everyone give you everything.
malloryerik 9y ago
They may still have the ultimate goal of reuniting the Korean Peninsula under their rule. It sounds crazy to us, but I'm not sure they've gotten the memo about war for territory being obsolete. Put yourself in the Pyongyang frame of mind, and at least the dream of taking "back" the south almost has to be alive. Edit: This dream of course might be second (or third) after regime survival.
- kuschku 9y ago
  The war for territory is not obsolete yet, Israel and Russia are annexing more land from their neighbors every day.
  - dogma1138 9y ago
    Russia is annexing land primarily to to counter outside influences. People might not like it but Russia wasn't about to give up its only warm water port. Georgia wasn't a clear cut case either. Israel hasn't annexed any land since 1967.
    - kuschku 9y ago
      > Israel hasn't annexed any land since 1967. Except for the settlements, which are annexations in all but name.
      - dogma1138 9y ago
        On land they de facto already control since 1967, they also haven't expanded settlements outside of Area C (they demolish "illegal" settlements in Area B all the time), which according to the Oslo accords is under Israeli control.
- RobertoG 9y ago
  I have not doubt that the supreme leader of the DPKR would like to be the supreme leader of the planet Earth. We all have dreams, but what counts is the hard reality. I didn't get that memo neither, by the way ;-). I can't think a war that it's not, in its root causes, about territory.