Don 't Underestimate North Korea 's Nuclear Arsenal

Since the 1950’s North Korea has posed as dangerous threat to The United States and its allies. With North Korea development of Nuclear arms and its consistent hostile rhetoric and actions towards the United States. With the North Korea’s development of a long range ICBM, more now than ever the United States has been put into a position where its and many of its

In the debate entitled “Trump and North Korea: Brinkmanship or Belligerency?” both Matthew Kroenig and James F. Person deliberate where we are with nuclear war and evidently how close to a conflict we are with North Korea. Kroenig started the discussion, addressing his position via a three-prong approach—is North Korea a security threat? What’s the history/how did we get here? and how policy comes into play? Pertaining to North Korea being a security threat, his overarching argument was that although it isn’t the greatest threat, it is the most urgent one, as they are an up and coming threat to us with nuclear war, having around 50-60 nuclear weapons and ICBMs available. In regards to the history/how we got here and policy, it’s important to

In the article “Should the United take more aggressive action to prevent North Korea from building a nuclear arsenal?”, it explains how the power of possessing lethal weapons can affect international affairs, and this is a concern that U.S. wants to prevent a war. The article describes how this became an issue after the Korean War; U.S. tried to prevent communism to spread, so in order to do it, the Peninsula of Korea was divided in the 38th parallel, making North Korea communism and South Korea democrat supported by the U.S. Furthermore, the article argued about the nuclear arsenal that North Korea possess since the early 2000’s and U.S. tried to stop them to develop such weapon. In order to make them stop, U.S. and many other countries tries

To begin with, If we were to go to war with North Korea they would be very pleased by it because they are not looking for any sort of compromise with the United States. According to the article, “The case for letting North Korea keep its nukes”, it states that from “the thinking here, as far as we can tell from the outside, is that you need to threaten North Korea with a credible

The article “ A war with North Korea--the American people aren’t ready” by Harry J. Kazianis is rated two for authority and reputation because of Fox new’s reputation for being biased. However they are also a well known news company, and is also known for not giving false information. “Considering the dangers America and its allies face, the Trump Administration needs to do all it can to contain the North Korean threat.” Some may believe they are already doing as much as they can, and this quote is based in the fact that it pushes for people to believe trump is a bad president. I rate this article's source as a one. Fox news is a well known news platform with a variety of trustworthy writers. The author is the director of defense studies.

I believe that the bias for this is liberal. I believe that it is liberal because the author of this article is trying to persuade people to agree on the side of the government. The government are definitely involved by scrambling a B-52 bomber to fly over North Korea to see if their statements were true or not. It is important that the U.S. determine if their claim is true or not. It is also important that we do anything to prevent a nuclear war.

Since the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPoA), or Iran Deal, was signed in Vienna on July 14, 2015, there has been widespread debate as to whether the agreement would yield benefits on both sides. Exhibited by the world’s quandary involving North Korea, discussions concerning restrictions on a nuclear program are no simple feat. Consequently, when a compromise is reached that results in the preservation of peace at a minimal cost, such as the JCPoA, it must be accepted as a success. Stated in Jeffrey Lewis’s article Scuttling the Iran Deal will Lead to Another North Korea, North Korea recently tested a missile that “flew 3,700 kilometers in altitude before falling into the sea of Japan” (Lewis, Jeffrey, Foreign Policy). With Kim

While The New York Times refers to ICAN as a “Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons” (Gladstone, 2017) in its headline, HuffPost exaggerates the organization as an “Anti-Nuke Group” (Adomaitis & Miles, 2017). Furthermore, the visual content presented in the articles varies among sources, for The New York Times utilizes tweets from the Nobel Prize organization while HuffPost not only embeds images and tweets but also a video,

The subject of Charles Krauthammer is the possibility of nuclear war involving North Korea. Krauthammer gives a fair amount of background because he brings up the cause of the crisis. North Korea causes the crisis of nuclear war with their making of nuclear warheads and ICBMs. Providing information about how ICBMs are an immediate danger to America shows the immense fear the people of America have. The information is a recollection of Krauthammer’s awareness of the situation as shown, “Given that Pyongyang has had nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles for more than a decade , why the panic now? Because North Korea is headed for a nuclear breakout.” He probably heard about this information, and put his spin on it, helping his audience understand

Although, the Cold War has been over for decades the threat of imminent nuclear destruction still looms over America; not from terrorist groups such as ISIS or Russia the country with the largest stockpile of nuclear weaponry, but rather, a persistent threat that many Americans do not even perceive as one. North Korea is not shy about demonstrating their nuclear weapons, with the most recent of their tests being fired into the Japanese ocean. Both the articles I’ll be addressing today give a clear statement of how America has addressed nuclear conflict in the past and how Americans still fear the same kinds of attacks without thinking of new ways their country could be compromised by nuclear weaponry.

In the article states “ Military planners included Japanese casualties in their estimates. The study done for Secretary of War Stimson predicted five to ten million Japanese fatalities ( Michael Barnes)". Dropping the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki help save countless of japanese life as well not only american lives too . Dropping the bomb help prevent the most bloodiest war and fatalities. Even though save many american was it worth the pain the fews people who didn’t anything childrens , womens , and mens. Let's remind ourselves the pain they went through “Hiroshima and Nagasaki are ongoing laboratories of the long-term effects of radiation exposure, bomb survivors and their offspring continue to suffer anxiety about the possibilities ( Michael Barnes)". This want some of the survivors still have to do just to be normal again , and even their kids will have medical problems. Dropping the atomic wasn’t the best idea for “saving japanese lives “ it just cause their lives to be ten times worst. Are you thinking the atomic bomb was a good idea and help save many

The Cold War was a frightening time for everyone involved, with the threat of nuclear destruction constantly looming over the lives of American and Soviet citizens alike. Since the Cold War ended in 1991, the immediate concern over nuclear war has definitely dwindled, though not vanished. More recently, concern has risen over the few more sporadic and antagonistic countries (mostly North Korea), that do have nuclear weapons. Where the Cold War brought constant tension, the modern nuclear menace brings a constant uncertainty over which small power (or potentially large one) may decide to actually use their nuclear bombs for gain or posturing. Nuclear war was without a doubt a much closer and much more direct fear during the Cold War, but today

The theory of Realism provides reasons why North Korea has positioned the nuclear weapon debate at the centre of its policy. One of the fundamental assumptions of Realism is in fact that each state, embedded in an international order characterized by a condition of antagonism, attempt to pursue its

The North Korean government continues to financially fund the research and testing of nuclear and ballistic missiles. Little information is known about the North Korean nuclear program and has been made available to foreign nations due to the secrecy and isolation of international affairs. The threat of a nuclear strike from North Korea has become an increasingly serious matter for many nations including the U.S. and its Asian allies, Japan and South Korea. Currently, there are only nine nations known by intelligent analysis that possesses the resources to manufacture nuclear weapons which do include the U.S. However, North Korea is the only nation in the 21st century to conduct a nuclear missile test that has been reported by North Korean

It's a device more powerful than any the country has tested before and the move threatens to undermine an already fragile security situation in the region. How will the latest move by Kim Jong Un, North Korea's young and unpredictable leader, play out?