Hacker News Reader

> Pyongyang can’t affect the US’ ability to respond in any meaningful way. Even if Guam sinks into the sea, there’s still South Korea, Japan, ICBs & the US Navy. On top of that, there’s no guarantee that North Korea could even hit Guam without getting intercepted, and trying but failing would certainly means a massive counterattack.

1. Those deficiencies in North Korea's capabilities will not remain fixed for much longer if the status quo persists.

2. The scenario outlined I believe assumes that the regime's continuity is already under some active threat, so it may not care much about the massive counter attack.

No, the article lays this out quite sensibly. If NK could reasonably assume that their long-range missiles would continue to pose a threat to the US mainland or military bases after a foreign aggression, then they could and would have to use nuclear weapons against any local aggressors first - their military would not stand much of a chance in a conventional joint attack by SK and the US.

However, they do not (yet) have the ability to safely make this assumption. Their missile launchers and nuclear weapon facilities would be obliterated immediately by the absolute air superiority of any possible aggressor (SK, USA, China, Russia).

I believe that their nuclear weapon program has the simpler goal to prevent limited SK and US aggressions such as aerial bombardments by continually threatening to retaliate against Seoul. This threat is fairly irrational, because it would likely trigger a nuclear response, so they seem to currently follow a "mad dog" strategy.

Not that I would know, though; I'm not a military analyst.

I agree. Also, I think using nuclear weapons would affect the willingness of NKs allies (at least China, but probably also Russia) to assist them in the war. China has already said that much.

I think it's much more likely NK will try to last the first couple of weeks while China and Russia move hardware into the region.

You shouldn't trust China or Russia on that.

Not sure why this is downovtef but Russia not China will allow US troops to occupy NK nor would they allow it to turn into a nuclear wasteland regardless if they strike first or not. A NK first strike might actually cause China to invade NK and seek a regime change before allowing the US to do the same.

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.

I... I live in Tokyo.

You 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.

If 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.

I 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.

The average American doesn't have their finger on the button of the US's nukes.