4 ms·
The article explicitly stated how North Korea might feel free to hit or try to hit places like Guam, S.K. and Japan without fear of retaliation because the auth
by vtange 9y ago
The article explicitly stated how North Korea might feel free to hit or try to hit places like Guam, S.K. and Japan without fear of retaliation because the author guesses the average American would be OK with losing Tokyo and Seoul but not S.F.
- stuartaxelowen 9y agoI... I live in Tokyo.
- jdale27 9y agoYou are not an "average American". But really, it doesn't matter what the average American thinks; it's about the strategic calculus of showing that Japan and South Korea are under US protection.
- wil421 9y agoIf any three of those got hit there is no way a US President from any party would not respond with some counter attack. I'd expect the European countries to do the same.
- dalbasal 9y agoI don’t really buy that either but the premise (why they would do this attack in the first place) the article suggested was degrading the US’ capacity. What I’m saying is that I don’t think they don’t have this ability. Any such attack would not impact the US' power over North Korea in any meaningful way. The part about the US absorbing an attack on a territory or nuclear umbrella ally is flimsy too. More to the point, it’s flimsier because of their “conventional inferiority.” The US actually can degrade North Korea's abilities (to put it lightly), possibly to the point of complete failure before sustaining an attack. It's dangerous for the US, but nothing like a conflict with a Major Power.
- kyleblarson 9y agoThe average American doesn't have their finger on the button of the US's nukes.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]