Why would the U.S. care about the fallout if they decide to nuke North Korea?
The radioactive radius of such a fallout would would probably only be a couple of miles (or less) as I don't think they would use their biggest bombs on such a little country. (And when I say not use their biggest I mean not wipe N.Korea completely off the planet)
Also, they would drop the bomb in a place where the blast would not affect China or South Korea.
The Korean Peninsula is stuck bang in the middle of an area that is surrounded by China on it's Northern border and across the sea on it's West Coast. On it's East Coast is Russia which is North East of it.
With the winds coming from the East Sea/Sea of Japan - imagine the fall out landing on China's East Coast. I doubt China would stand by while its own territory could be potentially affected by it.
Now think of the economic implications it could spell for the United States and the West. Asia is a production zone for most of our goods. Arab states and other oil producing states could restrict oil production to the West. Millions of refugees from North Korea would swamp South Korea.
Now who would fit the bill? The already drowning in debt West?
Destroying the North Korean missile before it is launched is the best of bad options on the Korean Peninsula. A prolonged crisis would undermine regional security and global efforts to stop nuclear proliferation.
I don't know what Economic implications on the U.S. you are talking about. In fact, I don't think you know what you're talking about at all.
Is it normal that I want the US to go to war with North Korea?
↑ View this comment's parent
← View full post
So the United States uses it's shield technology - now... what happens with the Nuclear fall out?
--
LizardSkin
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Why would the U.S. care about the fallout if they decide to nuke North Korea?
The radioactive radius of such a fallout would would probably only be a couple of miles (or less) as I don't think they would use their biggest bombs on such a little country. (And when I say not use their biggest I mean not wipe N.Korea completely off the planet)
Also, they would drop the bomb in a place where the blast would not affect China or South Korea.
--
dinz
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
The Korean Peninsula is stuck bang in the middle of an area that is surrounded by China on it's Northern border and across the sea on it's West Coast. On it's East Coast is Russia which is North East of it.
With the winds coming from the East Sea/Sea of Japan - imagine the fall out landing on China's East Coast. I doubt China would stand by while its own territory could be potentially affected by it.
Now think of the economic implications it could spell for the United States and the West. Asia is a production zone for most of our goods. Arab states and other oil producing states could restrict oil production to the West. Millions of refugees from North Korea would swamp South Korea.
Now who would fit the bill? The already drowning in debt West?
--
LizardSkin
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Destroying the North Korean missile before it is launched is the best of bad options on the Korean Peninsula. A prolonged crisis would undermine regional security and global efforts to stop nuclear proliferation.
I don't know what Economic implications on the U.S. you are talking about. In fact, I don't think you know what you're talking about at all.
--
dinz
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
I doubt you haven't take into consideration of the post bomb period. Do you think a single bomb will solve this issue?
--
LizardSkin
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
The Hiroshima bomb did.
--
dinz
10 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
See More Comments =>
Well it did in that case, but Korea has a nuclear bomb and have neighbours who themselves don't have a favorable view of the United States.