gzt I agree I may be advocating war talk here. But under what sort of conditions is war ever acceptable?
Unfortunately I have no solution and I can only just offer an opinion like everybody else.
My point is that none of us know how anything is going to play out. Its guesswork for all of us. It is my opinion that doing nothing is the worse possible option. I do suggest that an act of war in certain instances like this may be the only viable option. Besides doing nothing, what other options other than war are really options?
I see high causalities regardless. An invasion may however result in less casualties. If we do nothing, and Kim acts on his threats, there will need to be an invasion anyway (is it then OK to advocate war?). Do we wait for Kim to act or not?
Who knows what the Russians/Chinese are thinking. And why should we believe the Chinese that they will not interfere if Kim strikes first? My bet is that they will get involved anyway.
An invasion on North Korea would be extremely high risk. It cannot be done by stealth and any invasion fleet would have to be huge. North Korea has a fleet of around 70 submarines while they are mostly older types they pose a threat to any surface vessels. They have fast missile boats that could do suicide runs at an invading force. Add to this their Missile arsenal and airforce. If the US managed to land they would be facing a very large Army with at least 2 million regular forces and 5 million reservists, 5,000 tanks and 8,000 artillery pieces. They have been able to spend the best part of 70 years ranging every meter of their territory meaning their artillery would very accurate. It took a long time to amass sufficient forces to defeat Iraq, North Korea would be a totally different kettle of fish. An invasion would have very high casualty rates on both sides both military and civilian. It is not a viable option.
The most viable and most acceptable option is a diplomatic solutions. The diplomatic process is still ongoing and should continue and be the emphasis.