Is North Korea's threat credible? Does N.K. have the capability to do what it says?
Should we take this seriously?
Why is N.K. issuing a nuclear threat?
What will the US Government do in response to this?
How does this relate to the N.K. missile test?

Something most people don't understand is that the United States has one of the most intuitive missle defense systems on the planet, and that the chances of an ICBM making it to the US is slim to none. The reality is that there are coastal defenses unparralleled world wide, not to mention our pacific fleet and Airforce as a defense.

However, I would take any threat a nation such as North Korea makes seriously. They have a floundering economy and an isolationism that skews judgement worse than any psychosis on the planet.

I'd imagine that in the face of such threats, our defense systems will be recalibrated, the satellites monitoring NK will be double checked, and any deployed ships will be kept within striking distance of such a missle.

Most Americans without military experience, and probably some with, don't really understand that the US has planned for such a threat for the last 35+ years, and this is the least of our worries. If NK could get a sub close to our shores... that might be a viable threat. An ICBM is an unlikely avenue by which to attack American shores. Why do you think the Russians wanted to build in Cuba? Well... it would be hard to shoot down a missle in flight for 5-10 minutes, but one in the air for much longer wouldn't be such a difficult target...

Not to mention retaliation as a threat in itself. I'd think that even if we invaded, the NK gov't would think long and hard about pressing that button.

Is North Korea's threat credible? Does N.K. have the capability to do what it says?

Not very credible. Even if North Korea had a nuclear weapon (question of whether they even have one) as they claimed, there is even more doubt in whether or not they can launch it to the United States. I don't care much for what Kim Jong Il has to say because he is a just mad that he is sitting at the kid's table in the grand scheme of international politics.

Should we take this seriously?

We shouldn't but we will. I would support just ignoring Nkorea and their claims. They want some attention and giving it to them plays into their hands.

Why is N.K. issuing a nuclear threat?

Because Iran is getting all the attention without even having nuclear capabilities yet and NKorea thinks they deserve more being they supposedly have one.

What will the US Government do in response to this?

The usual political banter, about how we will protect ourselves and such.

How does this relate to the N.K. missile test?

Well if the missile is heading towards the US or Japan, its possible that we attempt to shoot it down. If NKorea sees that we have such a capability, it would force their hand since their missiles would be meaningless.

The very best situation that could occur if NKorea DID launch a nuclear warhead would be for us to shoot it down and then obliterate the county. No need for ground troops or massive land operations. The justification would be undeniable and American lives would be saved. Of course this a best case scenario if NKorea does launch against us but still an unfavorable one. Make it clear to Jong Il that they are messing with fire and that if they want to turn up the heat that they don't have the power to back it up. If they want to talk, we are willing to listen but will not tolerate ridiculous threats.

Is North Korea's threat credible? Does N.K. have the capability to do what it says?
First off, Kim Jong Il does not care about his own people anymore than Saddam Hussein did about Iraqi people. Given that he is willing to gamble with the lives of his own people, he is insane enough to attempt a missile launch at America.

Should we take this seriously?
Yes we should.

One question many people have is why does Kim Jong Il make such threats if he knows that the US has a superior military might. The answer may have something to do with the nature of his regime. Over the past 2 years, video tapes have been coming out of North Korea showing pictures of the slums and the hungry orphans. Here is one of the videos below. (I grabbed it off another site and then posted it onto Youtube).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ITBqRSMBWaM...h=North%20Korea
If information is coming out of North Korea, then information has to be going in. Kim Jong Il is probably on his last leg of power and may be trying to preserve his power by provoking trouble with America, as well as use his own people as human shields.

So here is what the United States should do. The US Government should send aid to North Korean exile groups and help them start a peoples movement against the dictator Kim Jong Il. A peoples' rebellion might make it harder for Kim Jong Il to put his finger on the button. The key is, we must not let Kim Jong Il get his finger on that button. If he does, a 1% chance of a nuclear missile hitting Los Angeles is not an acceptable risk. And bringing destruction upon North Korea will not deter the dictator if he is crazy enough to do it.

I think it's sad when people in general and Americans in particular make their blanket-statements based on the fodder of information they have been fed and made to believe i.e. Soviet Russia collapsed and they are broke and destitute and North Korean civilians eat grass and the bark from trees because their evil leaders keep everything for themselves and in effect sentence millions of their own people to death and extermination. That whole concept is too pathetic to ever really consider: that millions of people should decide to let themselves starve to death in silence rather than forcibly attempt to get the most basic of human needs: food. A regime that does what the mainstream is telling you to believe would not last long and if we apply our own standards when thinking about it, applying the western idea of it all...we can see how non sensical it all really is.
North Korea has food and money and weapons of all sorts. It's not hypothetical when we speak of North Korean nuclear capabilities, it's only hypothetical when we speak of North Korean missle attacks on a distant United States and what effects those attacks would create.
While North Korea is one of a few armies on the planet who could face up to the US war machine, the most striking aspect when in comes to North Korea is their political will and the dependability of their forces to take up the fight strongly against a strong enemy. For this reason I say the US will not attack North Korea. They did attempt to poke NK into attacking the South thereby ensuring a strong US military with the influx created by conscription. By that I mean the mini nuke which detonated in 2000 I believe. A South Korean official told the media, one hour after the detonation and even before North Korea officials were able to assess the site, some specific details about the bomb blast, and these were details pertaining to things he could or should not have known...
Is North Korea's threat credible? Does N.K. have the capability to do what it says?
Of course it's credible since it's known they have nuclear weapons. Capability? Again, yes.
Should we take this seriously?
Certainly it ought to be studied and remembered. When a nation with nukes speaks about using nukes against any and all perceived enemies, I think a step up the serious ladder is in order. Also, what's the alternative to your question? To treat threats of nuclear warfare as comedy?
Why is N.K. issuing a nuclear threat?
There's a large political spectrum as to why they would be acting the way they are acting and it's my guess that it's for more than one particular reason, which of course I won't get into. Too much to cover.
What will the US Government do in response to this?
I'm not a swami so all I can say is what I think the US government response would be. They would do nothing of note but lots of sabre rattling and of course there would be the MSM specials about poverty and harship in North Korea and garbage like "Exiled North Korean Palace Maid Speaks" and "Little Kwok Jong And The Food He Never Got To Eat".

Reuters rephrased the word pre-emptive attack in the article. I doubt the omission of the retaliation was a mistake either. This article has some serious word twisting issues Crash and presents the reader with a different interpretation the the original document.

Since '04 America has been intent on expanding Camp Humphreys base in South Korea. I have a feeling the missle test is a show of defiance on North Korea's behalf. What also should be mentioned is the missile shield being constructed as a response to the missile test. North Korea said the Star Wars like program could fuel a dangerous arms race in space. The region will see 22,000 U.S. troops and 280 aircraft taking part in staged war game in the western Pacific. To say this is a show of force is an understandment.


Yes and yes in regards to troops stationed in S.K.


It should be taken in the context it was presented in. A warning, invade and suffer the consequences.


A show of force from a country which has put them on an axis of evil list? See above.


Might want to think twice before pre empting.


A little bit of posturing to show the N.K. people their leader will not be intimidated.

You mean like when Stalin starved 7 million Ukrainians to death, or when Chairman Mao killed millions of Chinese in a similar fashion, or when the Marxist government of Ethiopia used famine as a political weapon in the 1980s? These things were all just MSM fantasies?


So how exactly have you assessed this "dependability"?


There's only one factor that's been keeping us from rescuing North Korea from the Stalinists, and its name is China. Contrary to Communist propaganda wet dreams, the people are not solidly behind their "Dear Leader" and ready to lay down their lives for Him with all the exuberance of their souls.


Indeed. Who'da thunk that all those years of providing North Korea with nuclear technology for the sake of "peace" would actually result in them building nuclear weapons?

I'm responding with a question to the original poster's 4th question: " What will the U.S. do in response to this?"

I've wondered why the U.S. could not implement an airlift of rice, corn, powdered milk; and clothing; and cell phones and drop them over North Korea in mass waves?

Will those here in the forum please enlighten me why our government never implements these type of "invasions" in repressed countries instead of pressing for further sanctions and sabre-rattling that only end up hurting the mass of humanity further?

Am I simply naive? What would the North Korean military do, drop a nuke on us because we drop food and clothing on their citizens? (Well cell phones... yeah.. heh, heh).

Please enlighten me. Thanks.

East answer. The North Korean regime has a long habit of refusing outside aid to it's people. If any of our aircraft came close to NK airspace, their air defenses would be alerted and proceed to attempt to shoot them out of the sky. How many American lives would you sacrifice to deliver cell phones to citizens whose own country imposes fines at best, and prison at worst for being caught with a cell phone or otherwise receiving information from outside North Korea?


You do realize that your own article states that this is part of a re-deployment plan that moves American bases south, outside of artillery range of the North, thereby reducing harm to citizens of the South, and the overall number of US forces on the ground?


Strange how the only people who agree with your position are a few far left fringe groups and the DPRK propaganda machine itself. Strange how the landslide of evidence disproves your theory.....but by all means continue to believe that NK is a socialist workers paradise....Dear Leader Kim will be pleased......

To add to what DTOM said, the expansion of Camp Humphreys (and Osan AFB as well) are in response to what is probably the biggest drawdown since the end of the Korean war. We are leaving every base from Seoul north, 55 percent of the occupied space. This requires some expansion for the two bases located in the south to accomodate the personnel, their families, and equipment necessary to still adhere to our security agreement with the ROK.


Because the DPRK air defense systems would shoot them down, unless we destroyed or disabled them before hand, which would be an act of war. Furthermore, the products would be confiscated after the drop-off.

Countries do send food aid (as we did), but Kim Jong Il only accepts the aid if it is unmonitored. IOW...the government takes it and there is no accounting as to whether it was used to feed the peasants or only the army.



You’re right about the weapons. And the money, well, he runs a currency forgery operation with estimates that run into the hundreds of millions, so he certainly has plenty of phony money.

Regarding food, Kim Jong Il himself begs for food, fuel, and fertilizer support to alleviate the “destitute state suffering from chronic famine” (his line). The North has become accustomed to regular vast humanitarian support; so it’s certainly a, shall we say, new, perspective to hear they don’t actually need it. You might be right, though. He did have enough food to kick the World Food Organization out earlier this year....



This sounds like a great plan on the surface, unfortunately things like this are never as easy or cut-and-dry as they seem. Haven't we funded opposition forces in the past that came back to bite us? Unless everyone is as clean as Gandi, and humans aren't....Furthermore, supposing the every defector from the DPRK is a saint, I see other problems with this policy. Getting those North Korean defectors out of China, for instance (which sends defectors back) could become a very lucrative and shady business. I've heard that it already is.

I don't think we'll be able to do much about this, unless the ROK is willing to cut off some of the vast amounts of aid (Kim Jong Il demanded and extra 150,000 tons of fertilizer this year, in addition to the usual 250,000+ he has received for the past seven years, and he of course received it). Everyone seems afraid to challenge him, and we can't do this alone, so they will talk and nothing will happen here. Kim Jong Il will not launch a nuke, he will use this threat to receive more goodies.

I would suggest that obliterating the country would quite possibly instigate nuclear world war. I don't think the Chinese would just sit there and accept it, and I don't think too many people around the world would look too favourably at the US. It would almost certainly cause insurmountable divisions between the US and everyone else.

The best thing would be to swat the nuke and give China a chance to pull NK back into sanity.


This sings a little too much like 'supporting and training Afghanistan to fight against Russia'. It ends up with another terrorist group, trained and funded by ourselves, who in the end turn against us when we try to stab them in the back. It never works out well.

Rather than rely so heavily on ground troops to protect the South, the United States is expected to bolster air units in neighboring Japan, Singapore and especially Guam, a nearby U.S. territory. Should N.K. strike first, or some other unforseen event occur DTOM, U.S. warplanes stationed in Guam can be in fighting position within a matter of hours. This conforms to Rumsfeld's plan of transforming the military into a lighter more mobile strike force.



Yes I am aware that 7500 of the 32000 armed forces have left since the start of '05, I am not convinced that this draw down is permanent. By moving closer to heavily populated centers America can expand the role of its forces in South Korea to allow them to intervene in regional affairs instead of guarding the border. This poses the question, are they there to provide security or are they there to be a launch point against China?

I can't imagine what you are referring to here. You are aware that Seoul is the most populated city in South Korea (the area we are leaving?). It is the capital of South Korea, afterall.

Yes, our draw down is permanent (unless something strange and unforeseen happens). It would be a waste of resources to leave and then go back. This process is extremely expensive....You realize that our forces are only present at the behest of the ROK? We have security agreements with that country. If they don't want us the government can easily ask us to leave, as they are largely funding our stay.

BTW, USAF aircraft are also stationed in Osan AFB. The plan to move most US troops south and out of what we call the 'Western Corridor' has been in the works since the Clinton administration. As much as it may conform to Rumsfeld vision, the overriding factor was twofold: to get US troops out of the range fan of NK artillery (which would be used to barrage the South in the event of an attack), and to consolidate resources, men and material in accordance with the gradual drawdown of forces.
I'm curious, what makes you think that this consolidation of forces leads towards an increased meddling in regional affairs? Other than a token force at Camp Boniface at Pammunjom, and a quick reaction force at Camp Greaves, US forces stopped patrolling the DMZ effectively in 1991 and officially in 2004.

Is North Korea's threat credible? Does N.K. have the capability to do what it says?
Should we take this seriously?
Why is N.K. issuing a nuclear threat?
What will the US Government do in response to this?
How does this relate to the N.K. missile test?

Everything I’ve read about this incident indicates this is really no big surprise to anyone. For weeks, UN countries have been warning NK not to do it. For once I agree that this is a case of the media blowing something waaaay out of proportion.

As for capability, the long range missile failed (flew a whopping 40 seconds), so they tossed out a few shorter range missiles for show. One source I read said that Jong Il is miffed because Iran is getting all the attention (…how sad when world leaders act more l like bratty 3-year olds in a sandbox than adults leading countries; the whole thing smacks of nyah nyah...) so he chose the 4th for its significance to the US. Yeesh, how mature.

But the fact remains that Kim Jong Il is a petulant whack-job; he's mad as a hatter, crazy as a loon, deranged, unhinged, and he’s more than a sandwich short of a picnic. All that makes him dangerous. There’s no telling what he may or may not do. Being nuts makes him unpredictable. By all means, I think the UN should impose sanctions. What else can be done, other than start an ill-advised war that would bring the 800 pound gorilla (China) into play?

Its funny, you made a very similar unevidenced claim in this thread:(http://www.americasdebate.com/forums/index.php?showtopic=12392&hl= ) and when you were proven to be completely wrong on fact on every one of your assertions, you went strangely quiet and never replied.

The North Korean conventional war machine most certainly cannot stand up to the US military, nor even pose a threat to them, if the US had any projectable power left. As Its stands they have readily available carrier groups, but little to nothing else which could be used to prosecute a war, certainly not a ground war. However three or four carrier groups would be sufficient air power to gain air supremacy over the peninsula, which were Kim sane, would compell some form of withdrawal. This is, of course, presuming a conventional war. Were it to go nuclear, well I am smewhat amused by comments of others here that they would just 'shoot down an ICBM' from NK. I have to ask, exactly how would the US do that?

By the way Truthmarch, care to provide a single reputable source which states that North Korea has 'plenty of food' as you claim? Thats an assertion so astonishingly counterfactual it begs to be supported by something...

I would like to see that evidence as well Vermillion- since, here at the poker flats launch, the only time that a "defense missle shield" has worked was once, that I have heard, and it was against a target that had a homing device on it, they knew the time and place of the launch, and the target and trajectory- even when they knew all that stuff- they still missed several times!

I am sure the dude is just blackmailing for more money personally. He is a fat little toad with too much power and influence in a small pond, and hopefully, when he meets his demise, the ensueing chaos may allow some sanity to return to that country. As I recall- his power base is basically a bunch of old generals that are hard as iron stalinist soldier types- so I am sure that country will be having some internal changes soon enough without too much interference on our part.

I don't think any country in the world at this point can be stopped from having a nuclear program in play, so we have to find some way of dealing with these tin pot gods in a rational as possible manner.

I see a major flaw in some people's logic regarding international politics when it comes to this issue.

How come when George Bush sat up on the international stage and laid claim that some nation's were in fact "evil" or any other event of provocation internationally by the United States towards North Korea it is seen as a catalyst of a whole chain of events of regional instability and yet North Koreas' acts of provocation , which were far more than just words, are some how void of any threat, regional shift or consequence.

Every action has a reaction, not just those done by Americans.

Obviously these actions are a threat, that is their entire intention to threaten peace and stability in the region.

So what does Russia do in response and will it have reverberating consequences, or China or how about Japan? What will Japan's reaction be and will it effect the up and coming Japanese elections? Will this further increase Japan's move for more national security through military means?

My comments were directed more at the shifting of troops away from the demilitarized zone from lob attack and less from Seoul Mrs. Pigpen. The are arming up, not down. Their prescence has not declined, merely shifted from a ground prescence to an air prescence. The drawing down is meant to serve as an illusion. The movement is motivated by the desire to build more infrastructure, air pads that are close, but not in the face of on an increasingly hostile populace. Camp Humphreys began life as an Japanese airfield. Mr. Rumsfeld is shifting his resources with the intention of bombing people, not invading them.



I disagree. The security agreements are window dressing to hide the fact that the ROK army is pretty well equipped to handle their own affairs. South Koreans have been trying for years to rid themselves of the rose coloured notion of a friendly big brother lending a helping hand. The truth is they don't need anyone anymore. As a consequence, Mr. Kim Jong-Il gets transformed into a more credible threat to justify a continued prescence instead of an economic basket case.



It has alot to do with Mr. Bush's work with the Sunshine plan. Early in his term, Mr. Bush put an end to the Sunshine policy plan which was a reunification process proposed by then president Kim Dae Jung. He also had a hand in pushing North Korea out of the NPT and stiffing N.K. out of some 500 tons of fuel oil. Later in '01 he declares them part of the axis of evil. This was an important event because it stopped production of the NK power generation facilities (we all have heard the comments of how dark N.K. is at night) soured relations, and played a hand in Kim Jong Il's decision to salvage the remaining uranium through reprocessing into nuclear bombs. Hey if he couldn't use the uranium as fuel he had to do something with it! Was Bush directly responsible? No. He did set NK on the path it is on today and is responsible for resisting attempts at reconciliation.

1. North Korea is a joke. A bad one at that. They are like little children being bad to get attention. We should be careful to not take their "threat" too seriously. And, what Bush is doing is absolutely correct. It would denigrate the US and give a false sense of importance to the wack jobs running NK if we forgo the multilateral talks. China, Japan, and S. Korea MUST have some skin in this game. Of course, the democrats are calling for one-on-one talks with NK since Bush opposes it and have seemingly forgotten their downright obsession with "not going it alone" when it came to Iraq and other situations where the do-nothing UN sat around with their collective thumbs in their kiesters.

2. Why? To get attention.

3. What Bush is doing right now. He's pursuing the most prudent strategy given the situation.

4. The missile tests by NK were largely a disaster by all accounts. The Chinese must be selling them the technology contained in stuff that Walmart can't sell at a big discount here.

A decrease by 15,000 soldiers wouldn't seem to indicate they are "arming up". If you have evidence that the number of US aircraft is increasing in south Korea, I'd be interested in seeing it. What you provided in your post before was something about Guam. They are in the process of (or active planning for, I'm not sure of what stage this is in) moving military forces from parts of Japan to Guam. The Japanese government is funding 75 percent of that cost. Doesn't have much to do with Korea, aside from potentially permitting a further drawdown; nor do I understand why you added the irrelevancy that Camp Humphreys was a Japanese airfield sixty years ago. It was certainly smarter to use a runway that was already in place than pave a new one.

If you believe that the US is motivated by a desire to build MORE infrastructure by moving away from Seoul, you have never been to Yongsan base. The place is huge, with vast facilities...it took decades and billions of dollars to build it all. There will be no replacement.



If the South Korean government doesn't want us in south Korea, they should ask us to leave. At present, they have not only asked us to stay, but are actively funding about half of the costs for our move, as well as the land necessary to accommodate the change of venue. They seem to think they need us, and are free to dissolve or revise the mutual defense pact if they feel otherwise.

To summarize what I am getting out of your reasoning, by pulling back our forces and reducing them by 33 percent, we are now “shifting resources with the intention of bombing”. I must assume that if we maintained the status quo, we would have forces up at the DMZ , which would be “antagonistic” as well. There isn’t much left to say, is there? We're damned if we do or if we don't, apparently.

I suppose we could up and leave the ROK altogether, and just might depending on how things go. The relationship with the Roh administration is pretty bad. The Mutual Defense Treaty with them is not automatic, but requires the approval of the US Congress. Given that the ROK has continued to provide unmonitored food aid that the US continues to warn is being shifted to its DPRK army, even after nuclear threats and missile launches, some might argue that in case of a conflict, the ROK was responsible for its own actions and not worth the risking of further American lives.

More food for thought, the UN could negotiate and sign a peace treaty with the Chinese and North Korea without the ROK (or US for that matter) thus ending the Korean War. The ROK was not a signator of the Armistice, just the UN. Any invasion from the North wouldn't likely be deemed a "war" (we don't have those anymore), but a "conflict." If that happened, it could take months to discuss in the UN before any action is taken, if it wasn't vetoed. The ROK might just stand alone, as you apparently think they wish to, and can easily do.

I'd like to add some observations regarding the military balance on the penninsula, and the American role in things if the balloon goes up.

The perceived lack of US ground forces available to project power to the Korean penninsula is just that, perceived. Less than 15% of our ground forces are engaged in Afghanistan and Iraq. There are lots of ground forces available, but in truth, it is unlikely that more would be needed to repel a NK attack. The ROK Army is large (albeit not as large as the NK Army), better trained, better led, and much better supplied and equipped than the NK. The logistical requirements for the NK to sustain a real invasion are far beyond what they can manage. The USAF, USN and ROK Air Force would very rapidly establish absolute air superiority, and would decimate the NK ground forces (see "Highway of Death", Kuwait, 1991).

If the NK is foolish enough to go nuclear, their best bet for survival would be to use their nukes as tactical weapons against ROK force concentrations in South Korea. Any other use of nukes will greatly increase the risk of massive US retaliation, with an attempted strike (whether or not successful) on an American and probably even Japanese city guaranteeing the Dance of the Mushrooms. One the other hand, a limited use would likely result in "surgical" retaliation only. A limited use is also the only way to minimize the risk of Japan entering the fray as well if it goes nuke.

China is extremely unlikely to back the North Korean regime this time around in a shooting war, as the Chinese economy is completely dependent on exports, and the "true believers" in worldwide workers revolution are dead and gone from the Red Chinese heirarchy. The cost for the Chinese is just too high, which, combined with their cultural racism (the Japanese, Chinese and Koreans all consider the others to be lesser races) leads me to the inescapable conclusion that the Red Chinese will simply toss the North Koreans under the bus.

Recognizing that the North Koreans don't stand a chance of successfully invading South Korea, the basic calculus everybody, except maybe the North Koreans, is using is this: How do we keep these nutjobs from starting a war that will be very costly?

How nutty are they nowadays? They're stooping to train robbery...
Meanwhile, North Korean officials engage in even more bizarre behavior. For example, food and fuel supplies sent to North Korea have been halted, not to force North Korea to stop missile tests or participate in peace talks, but to return the Chinese trains the aid was carried in on. In the last few weeks, the North Koreans have just kept the trains, sending the Chinese crews back across the border. North Korea just ignores Chinese demands that the trains be returned, and insists that the trains are part of the aid program. It's no secret that North Korean railroad stock is falling apart, after decades of poor maintenance and not much new equipment. Stealing Chinese trains is a typical loony-tune North Korean solution to the problem. If the North Koreans appear to make no sense, that's because they don't.

If NK decided to bring about armed conflict I would suggest it would be a ugly battle. Not only because I feel the NK army in whatever capacity it can would indeed decide to fight, Korea on a whole is not so large as to make a blitz type strike impossible. This is made worse in my opinion if the NK leadership somehow wanted to introduce nuclear weapons.

I personally do not see NK deciding to make such a reality come to be, more or less its probably some guesstimated move on there part to make any form of a preemptive strike less desirable for those that call such shots.

I would basically hope that sane individuals within NK leadership recognize that NK without nukes cannot beat the u.s in a struggle overall and would only lead to the downfall of there country, and even with nukes such would not grant victory and moreover would only grant utter annihilation.

Nukes for the most part in my opinion ended major world war as it stood prior to the existence of such. Its more an economic war anymore. I would hope that NK would see this and work in that way for progress and survival. I also on that note would like to think the u.s would not be so stern as to simply think they can starve out the castle of NK without those people making desperate moves, that option in my eyes really would be nothing more then a tragedy and a betrayal of SK as I think they would bear the brunt of most the horror.

As we have seen this week with the launch of not one but several missiles, NK is not too concerned with how the west feels about their nuclear ambitions. They are a poor, and desperate country lead by a relatively nutty leader. Japan has asked for sanctions in (a UN Resolution) and China has promised to VETO any effort to do this. Thus the UN is out. NK consistently tries to focus the “talks” as between them and the US IMO because they feel we are the folks with the $$$$$. Its essentially a blackmail scheme….

That said we know that with nukes NK becomes a major threat. Latest intel I have heard is that their missile program (long range) is years away from being able to hit the US with a nuke. On the other hand even with only conventional forces, they can be in Soul SK in hours from the start of an attack and if/when they have portable, usable nukes, even short range ones, the area is in deep trouble.

Is North Korea's threat credible?

No, not really. First, both long-range missle tests they've conducted have failed. Second, even if successful, accuracy is a major question mark. Finally, and most importantly, what would NK have to gain from carrying through with the threat? The consequences of such an action are fairly obvious, and non of them benefit NK in any way.
Does N.K. have the capability to do what it says?

Not really. Again, both missle tests have failed. They may or may not have the nuclear capability they claim to. If they have it, they certainly don't have enough to engage in nuclear warfare with the United States. All of the consequences of carrying out the threat are bad for NK. The threat may be beneficial, but the act of carrying out the threat is not.

Should we take this seriously? Yes, and no. Whenever you have a madman playing with nuclear fire, it's probably wise to take it seriously. On the other hand, giving it credence is exactly what KJI is seeking, and the more credence you give it, the more effective it is, and the bolder he will become. So, one of the best ways to take it seriously is probably to ignore it.

Why is N.K. issuing a nuclear threat? Because that's the only card they have to play. NK can't win a nuclear war with anybody. So, why have them? So that you can use the threat of them to get what you want. FWIW...this is likely exactly what Iran wants to do as well, although they may have more credence in actually carrying out an attack against Israel (which just gives their potential threat more power).

What will the US Government do in response to this? What they should do is .... nothing. Some sort of mad rush to appease him is, IMHO, completely the wrong approach, as is taking unnecessary retaliatory steps against him. Like the tree in the forest, did a threat that no one paid any intention to really occur? It probably wouldn't hurt to issue some sort of mocking statement like "Invade NK? Why would we do that? What does NK have that we would want? They have too many problems already. Perhaps KJI should deal with those rather than some nonsensical notion of the US having any need or desire to attack them."

How does this relate to the N.K. missile test? It's all part of the same game. KJI knows that one of the options the US has against the missle threat is to launch a preemptive strike. This is just an attempt to address that option. The nuclear strike bluff only works if there is no way to negate it...this is just addressing one of the ways of doing that.

Is North Korea's threat credible? Does N.K. have the capability to do what it says?

I don't believe they have the capability of launching an "annhilating" , not to mention against the US. They can't even get one missile to work right, so why should i be worried of an annhilating nuclear attack?

Should we take this seriously?

I think it should be monitored, but i don't believe it will cause any immediate and drastic measures, as North Korea hasn't done enough to show itself as a threat to the US.

Why is N.K. issuing a nuclear threat?

1. To show defiance to the US, and other superpowers.
2. Intimidate surrounding and smaller countries by saying, 'O we're tough, we can threaten the United
States, you better listen to us!'
3. To provoke national attention, and provoke talks.

What will the US Government do in response to this?

Hopefully, nothing. I think that they should punish N.K. for refusing to stand down, by means of econimic sanctions, but military use is definately a far-off solution.

How does this relate to the N.K. missile test?

All of this recent North Korea attention is all related. They have seen that they can manipulate other governments by using their "missile card", and want to cause as much confusion and trouble as possible within the news, and as for the threat, it is empty. They do not have the capability of such a task, and is more of a market ploy.