Please notice that in the thread title I said 'initiate'. Clearly if the North Koreans attack first, the South Korean Army probably already has the authority to take defensive action without even the approval of the South Korean government, as that approval, within clearly defined constraints, has likely been given already decades ago by the South Korean parliament.
However, for us to initiate an attack would certainly require a higher standard. What do you think ought to be the minimum standard required for us to initiate an attack against North Korea?
I've set up the poll so you can choose more than one option if you wish.
OK, I voted the second option in the poll. I'm certainly not a pacifist, but also believe that any kind of initiated war must meet the highest standards, and I think getting the UN General Assembly to accept UN leadership in such a war would be next to impossible (the UN is generally averse to war except as an absolute last resort). So I figure if the UN actually accepted to lead such a war, then we'd know that we truly have the full backing of the international community. This also means:
1. With North Korea realizing it has the whole world against it, it's also more likely to surrender more quickly,
2. With the whole world fully supporting our efforts, we could truly overwhelm North Korea's defenses quickly so as to reduce the risk of civilian casualties, and
3. with such an overwhelming force supporting our efforts, we'd likely be able to integrate North Korea into South Korea quickly enough without all the headaches we've seen in Iraq and Afghanistan,
4. We could do all this without bankrupting our economy since many countries would be pitching in, unlike in Iraq or Afghanistan.
However, for us to initiate an attack would certainly require a higher standard. What do you think ought to be the minimum standard required for us to initiate an attack against North Korea?
I've set up the poll so you can choose more than one option if you wish.
OK, I voted the second option in the poll. I'm certainly not a pacifist, but also believe that any kind of initiated war must meet the highest standards, and I think getting the UN General Assembly to accept UN leadership in such a war would be next to impossible (the UN is generally averse to war except as an absolute last resort). So I figure if the UN actually accepted to lead such a war, then we'd know that we truly have the full backing of the international community. This also means:
1. With North Korea realizing it has the whole world against it, it's also more likely to surrender more quickly,
2. With the whole world fully supporting our efforts, we could truly overwhelm North Korea's defenses quickly so as to reduce the risk of civilian casualties, and
3. with such an overwhelming force supporting our efforts, we'd likely be able to integrate North Korea into South Korea quickly enough without all the headaches we've seen in Iraq and Afghanistan,
4. We could do all this without bankrupting our economy since many countries would be pitching in, unlike in Iraq or Afghanistan.