How worried should we be by North Korea’s nuclear standoff? The totalitarian state recently conducted its sixth (and largest) nuclear test, with Pyongyang now claiming it has the h-bomb. Coming hot on the heels of a ballistic missile launched across Japanese territory, it’s fair to say that Kim Jong-un has the world’s attention.

Yet most analysts believe the real danger is not that New York, Paris or London disappear in a mushroom cloud. North Korea’s nuclear threat is significant, but it’s important not to overstate their capabilities. Even a strike against the US territory of Guam is likely beyond their current level of technology. Instead, the risk is that escalating rhetoric causes the situation to spiral out of control, leading to a conventional war that could kill millions.

So, should our strategy really be based on the notion that North Korea somehow represents an existential threat to the US and its allies? Is it possible that our fear of North Korea might drive us to rash decisions? And if a country like South Korea (which faces appalling loss of life in the event of war) tries to dial down the tensions, is it helpful to portray that as “appeasement”?

Curious to know more about North Korea’s military capabilities? We’ve put together some facts and figures in the infographic below (click for a bigger version)

What do our readers think? We had a comment sent in by Rosy, who is concerned that President Trump’s aggressive rhetoric (what she calls “sabre-rattling”) might really lead to war with North Korea. Is she right? Or is this just old-fashioned brinkmanship?

To get a reaction, we spoke to David A. Andelman, a columnist for USA Today and commentator for CNN Opinion (note that we spoke to David Andelman before North Korea launched a ballistic missile over Japan, and before the most recent nuclear test). What would he say to Rosy?

I think the principal concern with respect to President Trump and Kim Jong-un, is the fact that we have two individuals, both extremely thin-skinned and extremely volatile, each potentially reacting and playing off the other. I think there’s a danger of miscalculation. I think if we were able to remove the personalities from the equation, we’d be much better off and much closer to stability. Right now, there’s no sense of that.

The North Koreans, not to mention the Chinese, pay close attention to every Tweet that the president makes, and Kim is at least as sensitive as President Trump. He craves the kind of respect that President Trump craves, and he’s not getting that kind of respect or attention. We have to indicate to him in some fashion that we take him seriously. I think it’s very likely we will not see an end to the Korean nuclear arsenal anytime in our lifetime, or at least as long as this regime continues in power. I think we have to find a means of living with that, and the kind of tweets that President Trump is sending are not helping in that respect.

For another perspective, we also put Rosy’s comment to Lassina Zerbo, Executive Secretary of the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban treaty Organization (CTBTO). What would he say to Rosy?

We also had a comment from Bruno, who believes we are entering a period of global history just as dangerous as the Cold War, and in some ways more volatile and unpredictable. Is he right? What would David Andelman say?

I would agree, with some caveats. I think the difference between the Cold War and the situation today is that the Cold War was very much a binary event. It was basically the Soviet Union and the United States. Obviously this was played out in various theatres all over the world, but it was basically a binary event.

Today, we have just a multiplicity of players – all of whom have strengths comparable in many respects to those of the two superpowers during the Cold War, and each with different methods of pursuing that conflict. It can be economic, it can be political, above all it can be military—but, again, military in multiple senses. So, Mutually Assured Destruction, which was the principle guarantor of peace during the Cold War and which was a binary event, is now basically in most cases null and void.

I have an article in CNN Opinion saying that basically we have to hope that what will hold the peace with regard to North Korea is some concept of Mutually Assured Destruction, and this can hopefully be seen played out in multiple theatres. But, basically, the principle difference is this question of binary versus multiplicity, and I think that’s the principle concern right now.

What about Dr. Lassina Zerbo from the CTBTO? How would he respond to Bruno’s comment?

Finally, we had a comment from Maia, who believes that “All countries need to dismantle their nuclear weapons, but that will happen only when there is a sufficient level of trust between them”. So, how can countries restore trust and tackle nuclear proliferation? Here’s what Dr. Zerbo had to say:

If you’re interested in the issues raised by this debate, you can also take part in Debating Security Plus, a global online brainstorm organised by our partner think-tank, Friends of Europe. Debating Security Plus will bring together senior international participants from the military, government and multilateral institutions along with voices from NGOs and civil society, business and industry, the media, think tanks and academia. Register here to take part!

Should we fear North Korea? Are Donald Trump and Kim Jong-Un merely engaged in some time-honoured brinkmanship? Or is there a real risk that all this posturing and rhetoric could lead to catastrophe? Let us know your thoughts and comments in the form below and we’ll take them to policymakers and experts for their reactions!

IMAGE CREDITS: CC / Flickr – leef_smith


195 comments Post a commentcomment

What do YOU think?

    • Paul X

      Why exactly?, I know the US has a history of blue on blue but even they should be able to avoid an attack on N Korea falling on Europe instead

  1. Matthew Wolfbane

    You mean before or after they get their a***s nuked by half the world for threatening one too many people?

  2. Ivan Burrows

    Should we fear a lunatic with nuclear tipped ICBM’s ??? not a lot to debate here me thinks lol

    • Michail Panchev

      You mean – the guy in Washington? We definitely should.

    • Ivan Burrows

      Michail Panchev Do you work for CNN ? lol

    • Jesus Diez

      THIS COMMENT HAS BEEN REMOVED BY MODERATORS FOR BREACHING OUR CODE OF CONDUCT. REPLIES MAY ALSO BE REMOVED.

    • Jesus Diez

      Do you mean the fucking United States? I think is is good at using them…good and the only one, ignorant

    • Ivan Burrows

      That’s why the UK is rebuilding its military defences, 2 new aircraft carriers, new state of the art frigates, new subs, new nuclear arsenal, etc. Pretty sure Brussels will be entered into the targeting computer, just in case.

    • José Bessa da Silva

      Im sure tge EU will ask the UK to give up it’s nuclear arsenal as part of the “negociations” and then, when you refuse, they will call you unreasonable and use it justify all the mad ideas they will come with to punish you…That is what they did in my country. First the forced us to unregulate the banking system ob ECB’ orders, then they forced us to waste public money saving the bankrupt unregulated banking system , finally the accused us of “wasting money on women and drinks” and tryed to give us a fine for not following “rules”…

    • José Bessa da Silva

      Ivan Burrows, I’m sure the EU will ask the UK to give up it’s nuclear arsenal as part of the “negociations” and then, when you refuse, they will call you unreasonable and use it to justify all the mad ideas they will come up with to punish you…That is what they did in my country. First they forced us to unregulate the banking system on ECB’s orders. Then they forced us to waste public money saving said bankrupt and unregulated banking system. Finally they accused us of “wasting money on women and drinks” and tried to give us a fine for not following “rules”…

    • Ivan Burrows

      José Bessa da Silva The EU can say & do what it like, we are British and take orders from no one :) Many times in the past crazed Europeans with a flag and a plan to unite Europe have threatened us, the result would be the same if they did it again.

    • António Espadaneira

      Yeap. Then we grew a pair and we gave them the finger..
      We don’t run.
      Our choice.

    • Michael Lenders

      Ivan Burrows, you forget that the UK begged 3 times to become a EU member. In 1947, rationning was abolished in whole Europe, but it stil existed in the UK till 1958. Europe had it golden 60 and 70, while the glorious empire was still on his knees recovering from WW II. It was not until membership, that the UK finally recovered. And now, after the Brexit? The pound at his historic low, the slowest economic growth of the EU…Yep, you doing just fine taking orders from no one😂😂😂

    • Magaly Morales

      Ivan Burrows truly Ivan? Have a look at the Repeal bill. Isn’t that a copy of Hitler’s 1933 Enabling act?
      Where is going to be your democracy after that bill is passed? I’m afraid Britain’s democracy have an end date.

  3. George A. Moiras

    only the illuminati journalists attempt to share loads of fear amongst peoples in order to promote new world order’s interests ….

    • João Machado

      Well Matthew Ramírez, it should be no surprise to anyone by now that the US has an imperialist history of worldwide invasions. You know, to “bring democracy”…
      So yes, I fear the states and its constant war hunger.

    • John Lane

      He’s not the one running our nation, no president since Kennedy has made decisions for the American people. You should be afraid of the USA, psychopaths are in control of our nation and our people are asleep.

  4. Paul X

    In Europe? , no we are outside the range of his capabilities and anyway his focus is 100% anti-US
    You can guarantee the sea of Japan and Yellow sea are currently full of lurking nuclear subs so if dim Kim dares fire off a nuclear missile it will be goodbye North Korea
    Only other thing he can do is a conventional attack of S Korea, this would probably go on longer than any nuclear exchange but the end result would be the same

  5. Jaime Martins

    Kim is just trying to stop the invasion of his country. Europe is not in that invasion.

    • Artis Lapsiņš

      You have mixed something up. It was the North that invaded South Korea starting the Korean War.

    • Jaime Martins

      I do not mix the past with the present.

    • Thomas Galant

      Artis Lapsiņš you are wrong. At the origin, it’s USA that started the invasion in 1860 and divided Korea.

    • Jaime Martins

      The USA when they attack is because there is always a great interest behind, it is not to help anyone. Help is just an excuse. The territory of North Korea is rich in ore.

    • Michael Lenders

      What invasion? Except a few hundred tourists a year, nobody wants to go there

  6. Matthew Wolfbane

    You mean before or after they get their asses nuked by half the world for threatening one too many people?

  7. Saeed Aness

    no not at all why should we fear he who has a hydrogen bomb of 100killoton while American and Russia have thousands of bombs of thousands kiloton. this two countries can destroy the whole world we’ve got to fear them.

    • Michael Lenders

      Because an idiot has the button in it’s hands. And no Donald Trump can ‘t really decide to fire a nuke, but little Kim can.

  8. John Lane

    You should fear the US we could easily wipe out the rest of the world with little to no effort. Moreover we have shown the willingness to manufacture absolute lies as a pretext for war and subversion. No nation on this earth is safe from the psychopaths currently running the US government. Sad thing is none of them hold American values. I apologize for my nation as they know not what they do nor the real reasons as to why we do it.

    • Miguel Palma

      Sorry to tell you, but you are whacked or high on something.

    • John Lane

      What would make you say that. My statements are verifiable facts.

    • Paulo Granadeiro

      John Lane, you just forget UK France Russia India Pakistan China at least, are more than enough to completely erase the US.

      In a conventional war all those countries including the the European ones, also can do it (just check a reliable source).

    • John Lane

      Sir, you are sorely mistaken. We have more military might and firepower than every nation on this planet combined, our weapons programs are light years ahead of any so called “superpower.” Trust me I’m not happy about it but facts are facts. Worst of all we don’t even need to use direct force anymore as our ways of eliminating our enemies are almost solely based in subversion and economic terrorism.

  9. Antonio Caldeira

    I’m more afraid of the US than of North Korea. North Koreans haven’t been medling in other nations affairs the way the US has been. In due honesty how can one complain about NK developing nuclear weapons when we know that all those countries that possess them were unable to sign a treaty to desmantle them.
    Kim may be not trustworthy leader but Trump is neither.
    All nations should get rid of nuclear weapons. Although only one was criminal enough to use them, while they exist all planet is under threat of nuclear annihilation.

  10. Manuel Da Bernarda

    US is a democracy,N.Korea is not,which means that the degree of discretion be NK is infinitely bigger.As a matter of fact they can launch some nuclear attacks ignoring the people opinion and the media,wich by the way,doesn’t exist! Comparing the danger of US nuclear power to the danger of NK is stupid!
    I can have a canon against a nazi with a knife,the danger is in the mental circumstances of each one!

    • Paulo Granadeiro

      US a democracy ??? 😂😂😂😂

      The US asked the people before bombing Iraq, Libya Afeganistan or Syria ??? 😂😂😂 You too funny… !

    • Manuel Da Bernarda

      Paulo Granadeiro in US there is the right to vote and there is free press.They help us to defeat nazism from Europe,but I agree,this last decades they put on fire North Africa and Midle East on fire.Nervertheless,tell me which sistema you find better ,in which sistem you rather prefer to live.North Korea?Give my regards to Kim Sun!

    • Jesus Diez

      Iroshima and Nagasaki, wait…who was? Us is a “moneycracy” inside borders and the worst dictator out of them..since at least 100years

  11. Lidija Bojčić

    If it now seems farfetched that North Korea might be coerced or persuaded into giving up its nuclear capability, a great deal of uncertainty remains over Pyongyang’s strategic intentions for its nuclear arsenal moving forward. Is it strictly for use as a deterrent, and if so, as a defensive one to ward off potential attacks, or an offensive one to provide cover for conventional aggression and blackmail against South Korea and the U.S.? In other words, is it an instrument of survival or expansion? In truth, there is no way to know for sure, turning every policy option into a gamble.

    None of this alone makes war with North Korea any more necessary—or likely—today than it was last week or last year. It is possible that Pyongyang is as subject to the logic of nuclear deterrence as Moscow and Beijing were during the Cold War and remain today. So there is every reason to exercise caution and careful consideration about how best to respond to the threat North Korea now represents.

    • Philip Sabev

      Thats a funny way to spell Rogue Nation, Thanos.

  12. Thomas Galant

    When I was 13 years old, I knew that the north had an advanced military equipment, which could never be equal to the United States but still about to scare the international community. Moreover, the Americans make you believe that they did not know that the north has the capacity to create thermonuclear bombs, but the CIA (USA) and the KCIA (South Korea) know it very well since 1995.

    This bomb was created after the Korean War and even McArthur wanted to atomize Korea already at that time. Sometimes I wonder where international reporters from Western side of the world find their sources.

    The most important is to ask yourself who this conflict would benefit from, but also how the United States and the West generally helped China to fight Japan in the 1930s and 1940s. China has risen since that time thanks to the contribution of international investments, but also and above all loans of military equipment making it one of the five major military powers of the world today. We constantly complain them, but it’s the West that made China a super power today, and indirectly, that also made North Korea military power. It’s just a consequence and reproduction in time. So, of course, NK has a modern military arsenal established on the basis of direct exchanges with the United States, China and Russia.

    As a Korean historian and analyst of the inter-Korean conflict for more than 15 years, I am wondering about one thing. Why the media are suddenly talking about the international security problems between the world and the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea whenever this conflict dates back to 1948, and especially since today’s crisis is certainly not the worst of all those that have already appeared in the history of inter-korean relationship. Reporters from the West write articles in the way to feed the people’s fear and they win because most of the people don’t care about this conflict and therefore don’t know anything about it. However, they will never be able to indoctrinate me with their articles, which are anyway stupid things. Because of this subjective knowledge of korean conflict, they all believe third world war will arrive.

    Many Korean professors I met told me the same thing, the US-Japan-Korea alliance is paying and helping the North Koreans to develop their weapons because this gives the ability to generate money and political position between nations. This is not new when you see the history of the CIA and its interference in world armed conflicts. Personally, I don’t think NK will start the war, if it has to happen instead of USA, which is what they really want to control the whole korean peninsula and have the total hegemony in Asia Pacific. They already did it in 1866 with the incident of General Sherman Ship. That’s what exactly started the division of Korea and led to the Korea war almost a century later.

    At the end, China is the real target. China is too powerful for USA now, especially using its devaluation of currency. They have full stock of US dollars in their banks if someday they want to crush the US economy.

    China also use NK as a “Temporary Defend Area” to protect itself from the US military alliance and its possible invasion. The real conflict is not about NK but the one that will happen in consequence after this. If the north is attacked and falls someday, at the cost of heavy casualties, China will never agree to see its borders checked by the Americans. This would be the fearest conflict to care about. China also claims a large part of NK as a Chinese territory and will never allow the American alliance to take these lands, which are also very rich in resources like gas, gold, diamond, etcs, … .

    And at the end, North Korea is just a puppet state of China as well as South Korea is the puppet state of USA. Korean people will again pay the price of the suffering for just a wargame between 2 powerful nations. Korea’s fate is going to be replicated for once again.

    • sam goetmaekers

      I am not afraid of China. I am afraid of the USA.

    • George Bariz

      cos China is backing up North Coreea… otherwise,the coreean dictator will be very quiet

  13. Danny boy

    This lunatic in control of N.Korea isn’t quite the moron everyone thinks he is,his one and only aim is to stay in power,he knows as well as anyone that if Saddam and Gaddafi had nuclear weapons they’rd both be still alive and both be still in power today.

  14. Jerzy Zajączkowski

    North Korea may accidentally launch attack on Japan or South Korea, possible involvement of US, China, Russia and NATO

  15. Róbert Bogdán

    Absolutely yes. We can’t accept a nuclear armed NK. It’s too much a risk for our allies and if something would happen, Europeans would die fighting alongside the US. It would be our duty, it’s a no-brainer.

    • Nicolò Perini

      Let the yankees fight their wars alone, i wouldnt want to die fighting people that have done nothing to me

  16. Thijs Markus

    On the other hand. if they can hide behind nukes, they dont need to hide behind a 1.4 million strong army, and just maybe get around to doing something else.

  17. Jose Antonio

    Live and let live. Forget north korea.
    History has told us that people have to fight for freedom and freedom can not be given. Take o look at Iraque, Afghanistan.

  18. Ronny Wouters

    Well, my opinion on North Korea is………..o wait a minute, amazing news about the Democratic party you say? Do they have ALL the offshore bankaccounts data and information about Clinton that got almost the whole democratic IT department killed. Niice, good job telling the police the laptop was yours Debby, i love the smell of justice in the morning!

    • Lex Django Fisherman

      There is nothing to fear when it comes to North Korea

      -USAF guy

  19. Julia Hadjikyriacou

    Not unless the EU admin is a US puppet. People can see the truth you know. Repeating words just doesn’t work anymore. The people can see actions and agendas now.

  20. Maia Alexandrova

    North Korea’s behaviour is reactionary – the country will not initiate war, unless it is attacked first. The thugs in the White House, however, continue to gang up on Kim, forcing him into a corner, pointing guns at him. He will not back down and submit to their bullying demands and will attack, wanting just to get rid of them. Then the Americans will readily unleash all their military might and both North and South Korea will be destroyed, millions of people will die. This is where the current stand-off is heading to. Again, who should you fear? The bully with 4,000 nuclear warheads, or the reclusive despot, pressed against the wall, with a gun to his head because of his 1 or 2 nuclear weapons? I think it is not that difficult to see the answer.

    How can trust be built between the countries, so that they do not feel the need to have nuclear deterrents against each other? First and most important of all, the SAME strict criteria must be applied to all countries in the world. At the moment, there is one set of rules for USA and its allies and another set for the countries that oppose the American point of view. This is no way to build trust, but a path to an increased hostility, as we can see. International law should apply to everyone, but at the moment USA and its allies are allowed to violate it with impunity, while smaller and weaker countries are punished severely for the slightest move in the wrong direction. Every country has the right to be independent, however USA thinks that it is also entitled to oversee and control the independence of others and this is where the whole problem begins. The United Nations should be the only body responsible for world affairs, where countries jointly decide on the future of the planet. No single country should be allowed to grab the power of the UN and use it for its own agenda. The American government needs to learn to OBEY the UN orders, not to go around them and invade and destroy countries at will. Kim Jong Un saw what happened in Iraq and Libya. Will he be stupid enough to give up his 1 or 2 nuclear weapons when USA at the same time continues to have their stockpile of 4,000? I don’t think so.

    At the same time, where is the international pressure over Israel, India and Pakistan to sign the Nuclear Proliferation Treaty? Yet when North Korea withdrew from it, this was condemned and viewed with great hostility ever since. If there were the same stringent requirements for all countries, not just a few singled out ones, then things may have been different now.

    I see the solution to the Korean problem in USA withdrawing its forces from South Korea. This will demonstrate that they do not want to invade the North and kill Kim – the very thing he is afraid of and the reason for his threatening behaviour. Then Kim would have no reason not to follow and re-join the Nuclear Proliferation Treaty, for example. May be there can even be talks on the unification of Korea – it is a possibility. But Goliath arming himself more and more and parading his military might will not scare David…

  21. ompa2545

    EU may not fear North Korea;what ever kind of massive destructive weapons, she is armed !! ,however, America alone must prevent spread of nukes from North Korea to Milddle East & Eastern Europe. EUROPE shouldn’t care of it!,,,!!!

  22. catherine benning

    Should we fear North Korea?

    Why should we fear North Korea more than any other nuclear power, such as India, Pakistan, Israel and so on. Especially as North Korea hasn’t a hope in hell of delivering a nuclear bomb to a specific target outside its own sphere. As the EU and the rest of the world are fully aware.

    Add to that, the collusion of the USA Europe and others who backed murder of Ghadaffi by the Obama administration, why would putting Kim Yung Oon out of his misery be any different? Morality didn’t feature in any of those hits.So, he is no bigger threat than they.

    Make him an offer he cannot refuse.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UhnsHvz7UL8

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FmIRYvJQeHM

  23. Magaly Morales

    No, we should not fear North Korea. We haven’t got a single reason to fear North Korea.

  24. William Curry

    I fear the Unrestrained Savage Aggression of the U.S.A more than I fear the Koreans’……remind ….how many countries have the Koreans’ invaded?

  25. Alves Henriques

    president of nort korea is elected same way as president of EU Bruxells. the dictature we fear the most is the Bruxells DIctature that menace live of europeans daily

  26. Vladimir Putitin

    We are geographically very far away and their current missile technology is not good enough to reach us. As they don’t use infiltration as a form of terrorism, we shouldn’t really be worried about the DPRK

  27. Mark

    The USA under Trump is NOT akin to North Korea under Kim. C’mon, people, get real!

  28. Ivan Burrows

    The left, ANTIFA and SJW’s would say no but anyone who lives in the real world would say yes.

  29. Jorge Lux

    We? Europe? We fear everyone and everything, so why not fear the little rocket man too!?

  30. Ana Spínola

    Any person in sound mental condition should fear ditactors and ditactorships! And yes, be afraid of this trumpist USA too!

  31. Giannis Dimitrakis

    North Korea is not the only one with nuclear weapons out there. Abolishing nuclear weapons should include everybody, not just those who are characterized as “dangerous”. First of all, those with nuclear weapons do not have the right to speak about “danger”, they pose a danger themselves. Then, they are not a good example of manners and sanity when it comes to decisions, they prefer to threaten and push the button.
    Finally, this anti nuclear campaign post involving exclusively North Korea is misleading and unworthy. So is the Nobel prize by an academy that has given the same prize to some of the worst world criminals…

  32. Tiromanzino May

    I think we should fear more the Catalan Nazi-onalists. Just my humble opinion.

    Puigdemon said a couple of days ago, Cataluna will be the first of many territories to raise against their countries in the close future within the EU.

    But also sooner or later North Korea will get ability to send nukes to Europe. And North Korea is moved by the same laws than Catalan Nazi-onalists; hate.

    You can bribe corrupt or greed Politicians, but when you fight fanatics who don’t mind to lose everything, you are in a slippery slope.

  33. Hugo Miguel Carriço

    No. We should fear the constant interest of the United States to do war against all world. Let’s think about how many wars they have been in since their independence.

  34. Purdea Paul

    Quick question: Why do you always ask questions with labels on it, seems like you want the discussion to go in a particular direction?

    Should we “fear” North Korea? -really? “fear”

    “What does North Korea mean for Europe”
    “Is North Korea a threat for Europe?”
    “Are the Americans fucking everything up?”

    You do this in all the questions and debates you start, you intentionally make a controversial base regarding your subjects and that is manipulation. Unsubscribe

  35. Purdea Paul

    Quick question: Why do you always ask questions with labels on it, seems like you want the discussion to go in a particular direction?

    Should we “fear” North Korea? -really? “fear”

    “What does North Korea mean for Europe”
    “Is North Korea a threat for Europe?”
    “Are the Americans fucking everything up?”

    You do this in all the questions and debates you start, you intentionally make a controversial base regarding your subjects and that is manipulation. Unsubscribe

  36. Purdea Paul

    Quick question: Why do you always ask questions with labels on it, seems like you want the discussion to go in a particular direction?

    Should we “fear” North Korea? -really? “fear”

    “What does North Korea mean for Europe”
    “Is North Korea a threat for Europe?”
    “Are the Americans fucking everything up?”

    You do this in all the questions and debates you start, you intentionally make a controversial base regarding your subjects and that is manipulation. Unsubscribe

  37. Purdea Paul

    Quick question: Why do you always ask questions with labels on it, seems like you want the discussion to go in a particular direction?

    Should we “fear” North Korea? -really? “fear”

    “What does North Korea mean for Europe”
    “Is North Korea a threat for Europe?”
    “Are the Americans fucking everything up?”

    You do this in all the questions and debates you start, you intentionally make a controversial base regarding your subjects and that is manipulation. Unsubscribe

  38. Purdea Paul

    Quick question: Why do you always ask questions with labels on it, seems like you want the discussion to go in a particular direction?

    Should we “fear” North Korea? -really? “fear”

    “What does North Korea mean for Europe”
    “Is North Korea a threat for Europe?”
    “Are the Americans fucking everything up?”

    You do this in all the questions and debates you start, you intentionally make a controversial base regarding your subjects and that is manipulation. Unsubscribe

  39. Purdea Paul

    Quick question: Why do you always ask questions with labels on it, seems like you want the discussion to go in a particular direction?

    Should we “fear” North Korea? -really? “fear”

    “What does North Korea mean for Europe”
    “Is North Korea a threat for Europe?”
    “Are the Americans fucking everything up?”

    You do this in all the questions and debates you start, you intentionally make a controversial base regarding your subjects and that is manipulation. Unsubscribe

  40. Edita Buržinskaitė

    Both the North Korean piglet and the US wanker-in-chief are the last people who should be in charge of nuclear warheads. They could send the whole planet into a nuclear winter during one of their dick-measuring contests.

    • Jane Tse

      Yes, when Obama can have the Prize before fulfilling his promise to withdraw troops. Even worse, Obama’s rushing back to East Asia has created a chaotic situation in the Middle East. The refugees have been threatening European countries’ security.

  41. Saul Crucero

    YES,,NUCLEAR BOMBS ARE ALWAYS A THREAT TO HUMAN EXISTENCE. HERE COMES A MADMAN BRANDISHING HIS NEW FOUND TOYS, UPON THE INSTIGATION OF CHINA HE THREATENED EVERYONE IN THE FREE WORLD.,

    • Jane Tse

      Why are you blind to US consistent threatening survival of the North Korea regime?

    • Jane Tse

      If you can see other side of the coin, you can see that North Korea crises served to justify US return to East Asia region in the face of a rising China. As a matter of fact, China’s power growth with its manufacturing industry selling all over the world. Recently, China has turned to build infrastructure for late developed countries and technology development, etc. While, US hegemony comes from waging wars to flourish its military industry by stirring up regional instability.

  42. Jane Tse

    Without war, the US’s outdated arms would be stockpiling in the US territory. It is better to have them paid and used in other countries, and killing people of other countries.

  43. Jane Tse

    North Korea is not likely to strike against the US territory of Guam. Flying of missiles from time to time across Japan is enough to threaten Japanese people’s security. Japanese people ought to see whether their Prime Minister Shinzo Abe is wise to destroy their Peace Constitution and riding on the US chariot of war. Without support of Japan, the US would definitely not send their army to die for nothing.

  44. Daniel Parvanov

    We should worried EMP that will leave us without power grid for 5 or more years… Some of the cities population will not survive that…

  45. La F Ham

    I see the North Korean and USA showdown like a duel between two squirrels. One squirrel is clearly more nuttier than the other

    • Ivan Burrows

      That’s pretty much what Neville Chamberlain said in the 1930’s. How did that turn out ?

  46. Yannick Cornet

    Let’s just look at our empirical data to answer this one. On a daily basis, in the last 180 days, have I been more worried and frustrated by Kim’s or by Donald’s actions? The answer is probably of the order 5:175.

    • Björn Eric Ingemar Grahn

      Trump is in a way cuse all The world Will be affekted even Duran a limited one. Trump is also The president after ww II that arena moust likely to usel Them.

    • Carlos Branco

      USA is enemy numero 1 of all us in Europe. not north korea.

  47. Carlos Branco

    NATO enemy numero 1 of all of us in Europe. north korea is not near tobe our problem.

required
required Your email will not be published

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Notify me of new comments. You can also subscribe without commenting.