Why does't America attack North Korea?

America attacked Iraq just because they possessed weapons of mass destruction.

But there were nothing. Then Bush have changed the reason of the war to liberating Iraqi from Saddam.

As you know, North Korea is making nuke weapons and Kim Jong-il oppresses people.

Actually many people has died from starvation.

How do you explain this kind of double standards.

8 Answers

Relevance
  • 1 decade ago
    Best Answer

    Well, considering that both North and South Korea still have their weapons aimed at each other, the window of opportunity just isn't there. The terrain is god aweful, it's extremely cold and hot as hell. The US forces alreay stationed there would take a huge hit and the capital of South Korea would cease to exist. So lets hope no one gets too cavalier and lets diplomacy work things out. If we're applauled by the loss of life with the war on terror, wait and see what happens if the Korean war resumes. A little side not, the Korea's are technically still at war. They have been under a cease fire for about fifty years, hence their weapons are still aimed at each other.

  • 1 decade ago

    There are a lot of reasons why the US picked a fight with iraq instead of N. Korea. First, as you know, the DPRK (democratic Peoples Republic of Korea) already has nukes and if a large US invason force just happened to mass on the boarders, they would probably use them. Second, S. Korea is kinda scared of N. Korea and has a lot of influence on the US's N. Korea policy (no N. Korea invasion could ever go down without the support of s. Korea). A combined US/S Korea invasion would most likely win any conflict with N. Korea (esp. with the possiblity of shooting down some nukes with the US's new lasers/anti-b rockets) but S Korea would still be totally ravaged -- Remember S. Koreas capital is only 50 odd miles from the DMZ (within artilery range). Lastly, Iraq had a majority of people that truely hated the govt (shiites vs. minority sunni). Granted they dont like america much better, but there was the possiblity of setting up an majority opposition government. In N. Korea although info is sketchy, the propaganda machine works fairly well on the population -- N. Koreans, despite starvation, have much more support for Kim-Jong. (This last part I say on shaky ground cuz, I havent kept up with N. Korea for a while, but i can say with fair confidence that the internal N. Korean dissident movement is weaker than pre-war iraq)

    Thats a longer answer -- the short one is N. Korea is a much tougher nut to crack. ( and i didnt even touch on the problems of long term occupation)

    Source(s): The much of this info is based on my own analysis from News and books -- logical strategic planning, I invite any and all to give info about the state of internal N. Korea discontent.
  • Vinny
    Lv 4
    1 decade ago

    The answer depends on who you believe. Not too long ago, the US fought a war in Korea. It was a brutal mess, and ended with the division of the country into north and south that we see today. Ask any Korean War vet: that war was no easy ride, and the North Koreans have jets, a big army, and a militaristic society.

    As far as Iraq is concerned, I was in the first "Gulf War" of 1991. The US had it so easy in that episode that many thought invading Iraq would be a piece of cake. The reasons were always flim flam at best, but people wanted to believe them. Now that we are stuck in what seems an unmanageable situation, things look a lot different.

    The "double standard" is yet another issue. The US has frequently tolerated evil despots and dictators. Heck, we were buddies with Saddam back in the 1980's, when he invaded Iran. We sold him loads of weaponry and such. We've also stood by while evil dictators of every stripe have oppressed their people, as long as we had access to oil, mineral resources, etc, or the evil dictator was seen as "anticommunist". Right now in a little African country called Equatorial Guinea, we are perfectly content with the evil dictator there because he is letting us get to their oil. There is a nonstop flight from Houston, TX to the capital of Malabo for this reason nowadays.

  • Leona
    Lv 4
    4 years ago

    Yes if they go over the DMZ 20,000 troops their under treaty will die and it has a almost certain chance of happening. Taring a armistice is a big deal and is not like the empty talk Kim gave us in the past. This would be the first leaving of a armistice that did not start a war. Kim is in his own world and he chosen by his father to invade South Korea and that is why 70% of their GDP is on their military. It first Obama will play Chamberlain using Gates as a fall man but 20,000 dead troops at the DMZ will cause congress to say war or else to the White House. Well, it depends on what we do and how we fight. The easiest and most life saving involves 6 nuclear bombs dropped on the DMZ collapsing the 1500 foot deep tunnels that house NK's 50,000 tanks killing 70% of his Army. The tunnels are to deep for bunker busters but nukes would cause ground activity that would make work of it. If we fight a war are Air Force would be a sitting dock as their Army moves under ground under the DMZ into SKOREA and we will have to go man to man. This will require a draft as our present army is to stretched and 85% of the IRR is made up of broken bodies. The result of a hand tied approach would cause 20 to 30 million dead as they will stop a nothing.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    As Colin Powell said international diplomacy is not one size fits all.

    The short answer to this question which has been asked sine 2003 is because North Korea is allied with China and they would pretty much obliterate the United States.

    I'm sorry to tell you this but if you would just be a little bit more intellectually honest with yourself you would see we did the right thing in Iraq and we need to be very patient with North Korea.

    There were UN resolutions that the President had backing him when he went into Iraq. You may say he should have taken more time to let the UN inspectors do their job, that I think is legitimate.

    But I just think you are trying to play devil's advocate with a decision made in late 2002 and I'm sorry to tell you this, but your side didn't win this debate in Congress.

  • 1 decade ago

    iraq didn't have no strong back. Bush want to get even with saddam for his dad. north korea is align with China. Norh korea had over 1million solder standing at the border. USa and South Korea had over 300,000 solders at the border. Usa is not scared of china. Even through china posses the biggest army in the world, their ships and airplanes cannot match ours. America can attacked n korea, but china would jump in, thinking that america is attacking them. America pick and chose it battle. clear example, America didn't send no solders over to Somalia, but they did send solders over to Serbia. Both country is doing the same thing. Ethic cleansing

  • 1 decade ago

    America doesn't atack N. Korea because we are afraid of them. they have nuclear weapons and we dont want to start a nuclear war. plus there is billions of dollars in in debt that we owe

    Source(s): aljazeera.com, NPR, my Parents
  • 1 decade ago

    There is no oil in North Korea.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.