So in recent News, apparently North Korea has set off a nuclear

Nice try faggot. You won't get that info for free.

>>8334858
Might be the wrong board for this but. If North Korea were to nuke the US would we really just nuke them back? Is that the only option? Seems kind of outdated with little respect for life

>>8334881
it would probably open up the country for being taken over. I'm sure Russia would pounce at the idea of taking north korea for itself if its given a reason to.

>>8334881
Even if we don't retaliate with nuclear weapons they're fucked. The sheer amount of ground forces that would flood them from the west and north from US and Russia would take down that shithole in a couple of days.

>>8334944
Hey. Un knows his way around starcraft, and probably has a way into the post-WW3 NA pillaging alliance

>>8334881
Nuclear weapons are usually used as a deterrent. Nobody want to escalate a conflict with a country that could start a nuclear war.

>>8334858
There's a lot of other underground nuclear tests you can read about:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannikin

Testing Nuclear bombs in the air, surface, or under water has been internationally banned since the 70s. Some of NKs previous tests were on the surface, so you could see the underground test as following the rules rather than clandestine behavior.

>>8334881
Tbh NK probably won't do this unless Kim goes crazy. Nukes are used as a threat, not as a weapon. Only two nukes were actually dropped on an enemy in the whole history of warfare.

>>8335466
Things that only happen once or twice in the whole of history are also quite rare

>>8335466
>Nukes

You mean atomics.

>>8335500

Never is pretty common, though.
And no one has ever fired a nuke in anger.

>>8334881
We wouldn't. Nukes in general aren't used that way. They serve a more diplomatic purpose and empower a nation in that matter.
What would happen is that the United States and South Korea would have the right to strike with their military, since even China (NK's only "ally") doesn't support them anymore if they use nukes. China already stated that. Everything would be used but nuclear weapons, because the rest of the world isn't insane.

>>8335666
Good comment. britain has a nuclear deterrent, not because we are in imminent danger of being turned to sand by Russia, but because it allows us to 'punch-above-our-weight'.
So ensuring that Britain has a seat at the 'top table'

All BS in my my personal opinion - I would prefer to spend 35 billion pounds on seriously upgrading our conventional forces and missile shield.