Replies

Suicidal may not, but that doesn’t mean they aren’t dangerously irrational.

I am not sure I agree with your definition of "irrational". Hitler's invasion of the Soviet Union (and his failure to listen to his generals when it bogged down) -- that was "irrational". It was a plan which was borne out of paranoia, not reality, and had no realistic chance of success (therefore, "irrational"). What NK is doing is not irrational, at least if it is, I cannot see where. It is high stakes, to be sure. And dangerous, to be sure. But "irrational" implies a disconnect from reality that I just don't see here. He has played a high stakes game, showing the world that he has nuclear weaponry, and showing the world that he doesn't care about international norms and, in so doing, has increased, not decreased, his overall negotiating position (if not with us, necessarily, then at least with other countries in the region). How does that constitute "irrational"? It sounds more like a plan that either worked, or at least has a chance of working.

I am not trying to be argumentative. I just don't see why people see him as crazy (at least in terms of what he is doing in terms of nuclear weapons), suicidal, and irrational. And I also think it is a very dangerous thing to underestimate, or wrongly evaluate, a potential adversary.

I just don't see why people see him as crazy (at least in terms of what he is doing in terms of nuclear weapons), suicidal, and irrational.

You seem to be setting up a straw man fallacy. He's "suicidal", he's "irrational", he's "crazy", you say people are saying.

The guy has threatened us for whatever reason. He's dangerous. Period.

“I just don’t see why people see him as crazy (at least in terms of what he is doing in terms of nuclear weapons), suicidal, and irrational.”

Well, in a general sense it certainly doesn’t seem like a sign of ‘rationality’ to kill your brother or to blow individual people away with artillery. The way he treats his own people is also not evidence of a rational person. I understand your point about his strategy being somewhat grounded in his own regional reality, and also concede that even madmen can act ‘rationally’ in the context of military strategy, etc. I just get the impression that he has delusions of grandeur - and that is a dangerous mindset.

“And I also think it is a very dangerous thing to underestimate, or wrongly evaluate, a potential adversary.”

Agree, entirely.

There used to be only two rules of war.

1) Never invade Russia.

2) Never invade China.

...but there's a third, which has only come to pass in the last 70 years or so.

3) Don't f*ck with the US Air Force.

So I'd have to rate the current nuclear threat as irrational.