[cpursley]

Let's hope. The world did survive the breakup of the soviet union, which left nuclear weapons and material all over the former soviet block without a major incident. If they do set off their one bomb (under the slim chance they could even deliver it), it would be utterly terrible. End of a major city? Probably. But not the end of the world. Japan, South Korea and the US would wipe NK out so fast they wouldn't even know what hit them. The end of North Korea regime? For sure.

[jlebar]

> South Korea and the US would wipe NK out so fast they wouldn't even know what hit them. The end of North Korea regime? For sure.

Let's not forget about the millions North Koreans who would die as a result. They're people, and the number of them who are culpable for their regime's madness is a rounding error.

[angdis]

Yes. Although MAD doesn't necessarily require the end of the world (eg nuclear winter), or even the end of a regime. It just depends on consequences which are "unbearable" for either nation.

I've always felt that the best strategy against NK is to simply wait for the regime to collapse on its own (along with sanctions that isolate them, FWIW). This is fine as long as they don't try to invade South Korea, leading to swift US-backed retaliation. But perhaps now as they continue to develop and "show off" their nukes, they'll feel emboldened to "try something" before their time runs out?