Should South Korea launch a preemptive attack on North Korea?

Submitted ⁨⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago⁩ by ⁨sith@lemmy.zip⁩ to ⁨[deleted]⁩

The Nato chief is saying that North Korea is getting access to to missile and nuclear technology in exchange for troops. If this is true, should South Korea launch a preemptive attack on North Korea before these new technologies are properly integrated and utilized?

source

Comments

Sort:hotnew top

mcherm@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
No.

Starting a war is astonishing unwise.

Also, what will happen with South Korea’s strongest military ally (the US) in less than a month?

source
neidu3@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
No. NK has a bunch of artillery hidden in the forested mountains just north of the border. And and SK has a lot of population centers within within firing distance. And this includes rockets/missiles with some rather spicy warheads.

And rough terrain ensures that a quick blitz to topple the government and their nuclear arsenal won’t work.

Sure, NK will not be able to hold off SK in the long run, especially if SK invites friends. But Seoul will be leveled.

Plus, China really does not want a US ally on its border, and are likely to intervene.

source
- sith@lemmy.zip ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
  I guess the counter argument would be that the situation will only get worse the longer you wait. This has happened many times before.
  
  source
  - Hyperlon@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
    Why do you think the situation can only get worse given more time?
    
    source
    -> View More Comments
  - SolOrion@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
    It kinda can’t, though. ‘South Korea will be leveled’ is basically the worst imaginable outcome, unless you’re saying they’ll nuke the friends SK invites. Realistically, ‘no nukes/missile strikes at other countries’ is probably going to be China’s only requirement for assistance. Which would make it a horrible grueling land war.
    
    source
NeoNachtwaechter@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
They are one and the same country, divided by two governments. You should rather hope that they can reunite, instead of pursuing evil phantasies of war.

source
- sith@lemmy.zip ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
  I agree. But hopefully I’ll learn some serious arguments.
  
  source
morgan_423@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
One would think that out of all countries, South Korea should be the least worried about North Korean nuclear attack. They’re next door neighbors a handful of miles apart from each other geographically, and wind exists to carry fallout right back to Kim Jong Un’s house.

Same reasons it always seems so odd whenever Russia threatens to nuke Ukraine.

source
- someguy3@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
  North Korea nukes Japan. Japan: wtf again? We didn’t even do anything.
  
  But in all seriousness, Seoul would be nuked.
  
  source
- sith@lemmy.zip ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
  That’s an argument I don’t agree with. I believe the perceived risks of nuclear fallout is negligible in most cases.
  
  source
  - lurch@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
    Depends on bomb type, but Ukraines and russias region is gigantic compared to the region affected by bomb fallout.
    
    If it wouldn’t be so bad for the wildlife, it would be a decent strategy for Ukraine to dirty bomb along the whole border to russia, so crossing it by land would mean cetain death within a week. It could even be on Ukraines side to demonstrate it’s a defensive measure. Dirty bombs are less difgicult to make and Ukraine has a lot of experience dealing with radioactive contamination, too.
    
    source
    -> View More Comments
schnurrito@discuss.tchncs.de ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
Doesn’t North Korea likely have nuclear weapons now already? If it does, then you can imagine the result.

source
HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
No. As belligerent as North Korea sounds, it has generally abided by the armistice with South Korea.

source
yarr@feddit.nl ⁨1⁩ ⁨week⁩ ago
No.

source