[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Korea_and_weapons_of_mas...
[1] https://missilethreat.csis.org/country/dprk/ 10,000 km gets you to the west coast and significant parts of the western US, 13000 covers the whole of the US. NK has the Hwasong-15 with a nominal range of 15000 km...
Also, it didn't work. Not in Iran and not even in Venezuela.
"Passcode to the Third Floor" describes this instance and other missed opportunities to undermine the North Korean regime.
One funny side event to all this was when North Korea accidentally (?) revealed their secret uranium enrichment program when providing records from their Yongbyon reactor. They claimed at the time they didn't have a uranium enrichment program but there were traces of HEU on the records provided along with some aluminum tube samples and that scuppered the talks in 2008.
https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2008-jun-21-fg-korea...
Snark aside, the real answer is that in the past it was infeasible and undesirable due to the geopolitical situation with China and the USSR. Any major operation there would have been a Cuban missile crisis level provocation. After North Korea successfully built nuclear weapons, any sort of regime change games like the US has done in other countries became totally out of the question. There may have been a brief window in the 1990s where it would have been possible, but it still would likely have resulted in mass civilian casualties (look at where Seoul is on a map).
The only "good" realistic scenario for North Korea in the next 20 years is that they gradually reform their system akin to what China did in the late 70s, early 80s.
Even short of a nuclear response Seoul is in range of conventional artillery from North Korea and is dug in enough you couldn't destroy them all before the were able to do significant damage to Seoul.
What an odd thing to say. Even when there were monolithic governments ruling over certain sphere of influence like the USSR over Eastern Europe, you still had countries break ranks like Yugoslavia and Romania. A single unified government does not mean that individual actors do not know and use their own leverage to advance their own interests.
North Korea is independent for a variety of reasons, and it's not clear that a pro-US North Korea is an all-around win with no downsides for the US. I think both the US and China like having buffer states to avoid flashpoints for war.
Anyhow, point being - you're not going to get anything like that in most countries. Iran should make that clear enough. North Korea is orders of magnitude stronger than Iran, and Iran is already basically unbeatable simply because they were prepared for a decapitation strike which is pretty much our only card - Americans would never tolerate a real ground war which would entail hundreds of thousands dying. And this is all just ignoring the fact that North Korea also has nuclear weapons.
Also comrades from other countries would probably support them.
Self-sufficiency and exclusion from global trade can be very expensive for a nation long-term (a cautionary tale, since those ideals are a bit of a siren call nowadays to many Americans, after getting quite wealthy by doing the exact opposite).
- An enormous amount of artillery pointed at South Korea. South Korea would likely suffer the worst outcome in any intervention into North Korea.
- A nuclear-armed power who is truly ideological. Unlike Maduro, merely killing the leader is unlikely to dissuade the North Koreans. (a lesson the Trump admin is currently learning in Iran)
Artillery aimed at Seoul: https://atlasinstitute.org/seouls-48-hour-nightmare-from-nor...
Nuclear weapons that can hit Japan (and US bases in Japan): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Korea_and_weapons_of_mas...
Plus, the quiet part that nobody ever says is neither China or South Korea actually wants to reintegrate a thoroughly brainwashed population. It would be the worst refugee crisis ever by at least an order of magnitude.
German reintegration was difficult enough, reintegrating Korea would be much harder