The Kim regime is still in place, and while the nuclear weapons cause economic hardship (through sanctions) for common folk, upper management still lives in luxury. China has been rumored to prefer to install thier own puppet dictator several times. Hasn't happened yet. Are the nukes a deterrent for them as well? Hard to quantify really, but the nukes factor in, no doubt.Octavious wrote: ↑Wed Dec 02, 2020 3:53 pmYou think so? I'm not convinced nuclear weapons have achieved anything for North Korea other than more deaths due to starvation and poverty. China guaranteed the regime's survival, combined with half a century of not invading anyone. Take China out of the picture and my bet is that North Korea's pursuit of nuclear weapons would have increased the odds of invasion, not reduced it. The Iranians are more intelligent and have been working on an effective method of delivery as the priority, but even so there will be a period of time in which Iran will be both vulnerable to conventional attack and too much of a threat to ignore. Iran don't have a China
Since Iran lacks a "China" currently, nukes would be the best deterrent of enemies of all sizes (especially Israel and Saudi Arabia). The potential downfall of such a strategy is that the economic consequences put enough pressure on the common folk that they attempt to overthrow the government. It seems more likely to happen in a nation such as Iran vs NK.
They appear to be in a very tight spot. I don't see them backing down, yet they are doing their best to avoid all out war with Israel (because they can't win). Theoretically, leadership could accept a *massive stimulus* to lay down arms. But, they would have to accept a lesser role in the Middle East. Rarely can those in power swallow that pill. Pride is certainly one of the deadliest sins...