[TigerLikesRooster]

P!

[John123]

The effectiveness of deterrence is difficult to prove

I don't think any country with nuclear weapons has ever been invaded... sounds like a pretty effective deterrent to me.

[Pan_Yan]

... since the weapons would be more visible and could more plausibly be fired, perhaps inadvertently, following an attack.

Inadvertently fire a nuclear weapon?

[Jack Hammer]

Given South Korea’s position vis a vis both North Korea and China, the real question is why haven’t they obtained nukes long before this?

[bmwcyle]

The North has been working with nukes since they secured the Japanese nuke program running in their country since WW II. We have given south a defense since the late 1940’s. Now other countries have seen how we ran out on all our current allies. I am not surprised.

[RayChuang88]

What South Korea probably wants are 0.5 to 1 kT nuclear artillery shells—such shells would stop a full-scale North Korean invasion fairly quickly, because frankly, North Korea may have a big army for “show” but how effective is their weaponry?

[Lonesome in Massachussets]

Tom Friedman must be so proud. Chinese foreign policy is leading to the nuclearization of Japan and South Korea and driving Vietnam into the arms of the U.S.

[Iris7]

I have some personal information on US nuclear weapons in Korea during the 1970's. The trigger was nearly pulled on at least several occasions. In South Korea's shoes, with Obama having Permissive Action Link control of all US warheads, I would most affirmatively get my own serious level nuclear weapon and delivery systems on line as soon as possible.

You think Obama would pull the trigger if the North invades? Hah. Give me a break.