Hacker News Reader

Comment by crispyambulance | Hacker News Reader

The only realistic option is to wait this out.

As nutty as they seem neither NK nor USA are going to attempt a first-strike. For NK, it would mean a swift, permanent end to the regime. For the USA, it would mean an unacceptable level of causalities (not to mention a global economic disaster).

There is dissent in NK, it will eventually take out dear leader. This is the most desirable end-game for NK.

View on HN

If the missle had hit japan this morning, would you still think that?

What he said was:

Best case: NK government falls on its own. Least casualties.

Worst case: NK attacks (i.e. the missile had hit) or gets attacked, massive casualties on all sides.

How does your appeal to emotion change any of that?

What I was referring to this: "As nutty as they seem neither NK nor USA are going to attempt a first-strike" My question was not an appeal to emotion. My question was, "Had the missle not broken up but instead hit Japan". I'm not convinced they didn't attempt a first strike this morning, it doesn't seem like "wait them out, they'll probably never strike" is a sound argument to me given that they are already launching missiles over Japan.

The missile was clearly a message. According to the CNN journalist that talked about it, who is in NK, this is the response to the "fire and fury" threat by Trump.

Yes. The missile did not have a warhead on it.

If, somehow, it ended up hitting Japan it certainly would have been a big scary incident but few causalities if any.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com