[Closed] What's the evidence that North Korea is a threat?

Scary if you don't read the actual link you provided.

While the President does have unilateral authority as commander-in-chief to order that nuclear weapons be used for any reason at any time, the actual procedures and technical systems in place for authorizing the execution of a launch order requires a secondary confirmation under a two-man rule, as the President's order is subject to secondary confirmation by the Secretary of Defense

but in the last 20 years the US in particular has been busy developing a new generation of hydrogen bombs. These things are so powerful they can destroy whole countries, never mind cities.

Not entirely sure what you are on about, badnewz - pretty much all research into new weapons is going into making them smaller in yield, not larger.

The "holy grail" is to create a fusion weapon that does not need a fission ignitor. This would allow for a weapon where a yield larger than a conventional bomb can be delivered against target without all the messy fallout normally associated with current nuclear weapons. Being able to take out a bunker with, say, a 500t weapon that doesn't prevent your own forces subsequently visiting is *very* appealing.

Destroying large parts of countries is entirely pointless and messy. And has been possible since the late 1950's anyway.

Rachel

Scary if you don't read the actual link you provided.

While the President does have unilateral authority as commander-in-chief to order that nuclear weapons be used for any reason at any time, the actual procedures and technical systems in place for authorizing the execution of a launch order requires a secondary confirmation under a two-man rule, as the President's order is subject to secondary confirmation by the Secretary of Defense. [b]If the Secretary of Defense does not concur, then the President may in his sole discretion fire the Secretary. The Secretary of Defense has legal authority to approve the order, but cannot veto it[/b]

short attention span?

So he has arbitrary power to fire...his secretary, even I have that power.

Presumably, he then has to appoint a new secretary, who does concur, before he can fire the missiles?

That could take months to get through HR.

President may in his sole discretion fire the Secretary.

I read that as sending Mattis blasting towards Pyonyang!

[img] [/img]

Kim Jong Un. The early years...

😆

What I want to know in all this is, what are the US and China trying to get away with in the background? I'm convinced this is all a distraction from some nasty little plot from one or both of the "super" powers. As has been said NK is irrelevant in the great scheme of things.

This is an excellent read and makes done very valid points

How the nuclear-armed nations brought the North Korea crisis on themselves

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/sep/05/nuclear-armed-nations-brought-the-north-korea-crisis-on-themselves?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Copy_to_clipboard

hit them with flour bombs?

Yeah - Teach those bloody Coeliacs a lesson.

http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/international/i-have-no-****g-idea-where-im-going-with-this-admits-kim-jong-un-20170904135051

Probabaly fairly accurate!