Yeah the Korean War was in the 50's. Anyway, you're mixing fake history with current events. The context, incentives, and efforts are very different today than they were when South Korea was still a military dictatorship (the 70s, as you've provided).
Right, so the political context only matters where you bring it up.
This was a military engagement that has escalated from South Korea provocations. The way you write it makes it seem like on a whim the DPRK rolled some dice and decided to kill people.
Hi, I was operating an airborne ISR platform's sensors over the Korean peninsula that day, which I won't forget, Nov 23 2010 afternoon. Specifically, I was sitting on the 96th Island Defense Regiment's radio network. You are right--it wasn't a roll of the dice. It was premeditated murder before any "ROK provocation". North Korea deployed several MiG-23s and artillery batteries to the area nearly a month in advance. Kim Jong Il visited the 96th IDR about a month beforehand as well IIRC, passing instructions for what was to come. Anyway, fast forward to October. South Korea is doing artillery training from Yonpyeong Island as they do every year. The shots are being fired southwest-wards. This goes on for nearly 5 hours. NK, after 5 hours of "being provoked", sends a short message to SK saying "you are shooting at our water". Just two minutes after they warn SK, I then intercept the 96th IDR telling its subordinate artillery station on Mudo to prepare as planned. They fire on the South Korean island, killing two ROK MArines and two ROK civilians, because the South had provoked them with an artillery exercise they have done for decades by firing "one round into North Korean waters". The rest is history
For spouting utter BS, you probably shouldn't have picked one of the few people in the world who was actually in the know that day.
I know you are implying that this means their capability is not a deterrent. I also know that you are using this to be purposefully misleading. Countries stockpile many more weapons than they would need under the assumption they have exactly one enemy and that every weapon will land.
Ah, so you know how many warheads NK has, then. Please, enlighten the rest of us.
Laughable.
It is--why spend hundreds of millions developing a nuke when your existing chem/bio stocks fitted to howitzers and Scuds can exact six digits of casulties?
This assumes that the DPRK will be invaded before they reach strategic mass. It also assumes many things about ICBMs and their strategic use. Sure, DPRK's ability to build a full nuclear triad (what you'd need to fend G20) - especially the aerial leg - is a long way off. But they have a program for a submarine leg and they have a program for a land leg. And they can do enough damage with that to "bloody the nose" of - and cause and international crisis for - G20 militaries. You're analysis here lacks depth.
Thanks for confirming they lack the strategic mass to strike beyond the peninsula. Thanks for also confirming that their entire concept of sovereignty revolves around causing human crises.
Forward deployment of a nuclear weapon for an ally of the Soviet Union at the height of the Cold War is nothing like the situation on the peninsula.
But you're sitting here telling me that the nukes are meant to threaten the US?
Easy.
And all of your counterexamples tell me that there is a framework to dismantle NK or slowly pick at NK without NK taking nuclear action. Thanks for the confirmation.
How could I be both dishonest and "miss the distinguishing factors"? You're continually accusing me of contradicting claims.
By that I mean you are being a useful idiot.
The North and South have been in bilateral talks at various points about peace treaty.
Last time was 2000; eg, before NK declared itself as a nuclear weapons state from your own frame of argument and selective history.
Lol after the US cut it off from the international economy?!
How did the US cut it off for the majority of its history? They were free to trade with other nations until 2006, in which the first sanctions were applied. What undid North Korea was its unrealistic reliance on debt to USSR. Their own terrible economic model undid them from the 80s.