North Korea or Iran which one is more threatening?

[White Knight]

Hello everyone heres a big world issue right now, I think people are highly aware of and have exclusive opinions and thoughts on these matters.


So which country is more threatening to you? or do you see them both equally as dangerous, as many do. I know I do.


North Korea has Nuclear Weapons (95% certianity)

Iran is in devolopment of Nuclear weapons and could very well have them by the end of this year or next year.


Both have the abilities to effect our allies and the US. North Korea has its Sister country South Korea. It also has Japan.

Iran Has Israel, Iraq, etc etc.


So you've read the question. now whats your answer. please post after you vote. Thank You. God Bless, Pax Christi.

[CanCath]

the Unites States of America have nuclear weapons...

What's your point exactly? Maybe you can explain why the possession of Nuclear weapons makes a country more of a threat than a country that doesn't?

And what do you mean by "Korea has its Sister country South Korea" and "Iran has Iraq". What do you mean by HAS?

[CanCath]

And by the way, in order to make such a poll, you should have an option that says "I don't think neither are dangerous and require no special attention"

otherwise, it seems you are assuming you are right into thinking that at least one of these countries are a threat.


Needless to say... I'm not voting.

Edited August 8, 2005 by CanCath

[peach_cube]

I picked Iran merely for likely ties with terrorism. Not saying that they do have ties, but if the current regime where to fall and they had nuclear weapons, the weapons would fall to terrorists.

[Michael D.]

I vote for neither.

I don't think that Iran is a threat with nukes because they seem to at least be willing to work with the international community to a point.

I dont think Korea is a threat because even though they have nukes... and i guess have had them for a long time... they dont really have the power or industry otherwise to be a problem.

In both cases I don't think that either country is a threat because of their nukes. I don't think that either would ever consider using them unless they were in a very very very desperate situation, say like they were being invaded. As I see it having nukes is mostly just a way for their contries to get off the little kid table in the eyes of the world. Its more about respect than the actual threat of their use.

The real threat with these countires having nukes, and really any country... is that they will fall into the hands of people with absoloutely no regard for the lives of others and their own lives. Countries are generally smart enough not to use them... militant other types who plant car bombs and what not, those are the people who i worry about where nukes are concerned.

[track2004]

I think they are both dangerous and that we (the US) are going to have to deal with them during my life time (in the next 50ish years). Iran seems to me like like that big mean guy who just sits in the shadows while he plots your demise. Korea is more like the guy who is showing off his weapon in the bar though he has no idea how to acutally use it, though he wants to plot your demise. Either way I think it would take some effort on our part to get them to use the nukes.

It seems he meant that both contries have connections to countries that we actually like. So they wouldn't have to send a nuke to actual US soil for us to get upset with them.

Anyway to me they both seem very sketchy and we have a lot of unresolved issues with both of them. And by unresolved issues I mean that we had a good deal to do with making them bad places to live. They both hate us anyway so who knows what will happen.

[Paladin D]

Both are dangerous.

[musturde]

Korea is all talk so far compared to Iran. Iran is full of terrorists... soo much that they had to export some of them to Lebanon. : Hezbollah has strong ties with Iran and it was Irani extremists who brought them there.

[Winchester]

Security is the most important regarding possession of nuclear weapons. Most national leaders would not at this point publicly use a nuclear weapon, as to do so is sure annihiliation at the hands of the US.

Religiously motivated individuals are the greatest threat. They are everywhere, at every level of society. They have no compunctions about using these weapons, as they have no country.

Luckily, it would be extremely difficult for a terrorist to properly deliver a nuclear weapon, thus reducing the possible damage. It would be significant, but possibly more galvanizing than horrifying. Smaller strikes leading to a few thousand deaths are probably more effective (chemical and biological attacks spread a great deal of terror)

The most likely nuclear scenario is still a backpack nuke delivered on foot at ground level. The prospect is horrifying, and response to it would be a logistical nightmare.

Dealing with North Korea will be difficult, as will be dealing with Iran. Iraq is a tactical maneuver designed to create a foothold in the west. All the "good" things about Iraq that the press cites (no WMD-which is carp; a grenade is a WMD, no ties or weak ties to terrorists) make it ideal for a position to be held by the US.

[hierochloe]

Comparison of threats:

Korea: Technologically stronger, ideallogically weaker

Iran: Idealogically stronger, technologically weaker

Both are probably equally insane altogether as far as the use of an unmanned nuclear warhead, Korea being influenced by a tyrannical dictator, Iran essentially by unfriendly theocracy.

[popestpiusx]

Islam is more dangerous than communism. Communism is self destructive. It is more difficult to spread. Islam is the greatest threat to western civilization, and indeed all civilization. What they can't do (or have not done) by military conquest, they do by outpopulating the candyass Catholics and other westerners who are afraid to have more than 2.2 children.

[crusader1234]

Better the devil you know than the devil you don't, as the proverb goes. North Korea is not as large as Iran, nor does it have the resources. They are also outspoken about their objectives and their resources. Iran isn't direct in its threats, so if the proverb holds true we should be scared of them. But to be quite honest, I'm not into deciding who is a devil and who isn't. At this point, we have no real proof that Iran is a devil, aside from those of you that assert that Islam is dangerous in general. I don't think anybody can really pass judgement on this issue as one side of it is still so unclear.

[Socrates]

[quote name='crusader1234' date='Aug 17 2005, 03:07 AM']  At this point, we have no real proof that Iran is a devil, aside from those of you that assert that Islam is dangerous in general.  I don't think anybody can really pass judgement on this issue as one side of it is still so unclear.
[right][snapback]687468[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

As to whether Islam is "dangerous," we need only look at its history, from its initial spread through war and violent conquest to 9/11 and the London bombings.

"Tolerant" p.c. liberal types are forever turning a blind eye to the true nature of Islam.

I'd probably put my money on on Iran as being more dangerous, much as I despise Kim Jong Il's Commie tyranny. Kim's a complete crazy loon, but I don't think he's actually crazy enough to risk getting himself nuked. He's mainly interested in keeping his own power.

Edited August 17, 2005 by Socrates

[crusader1234]

[quote name='Socrates' date='Aug 17 2005, 06:26 PM']"Tolerant" p.c. liberal types are forever turning a blind eye to the true nature of Islam.[/quote]

Oh my, the true nature of Islam. I can't argue with that logic.

[White Knight]

So are you denining Islam is a threat?