This time they said they are scrapping all agreements and assert the right to a preemptive nuclear strike. That is a small distinction, and maybe I am expecting too much in believing diplomats or dictators actually mean what they say (North Korea has repudiated the ceasefire literally half a dozen times, after all.) However, this announcements language is very different from that of previous ones, as are the accompanying actions, which could not be more aggressive short of outright attack (several of which, for that matter, North Korea committed after their last armistice announcement.)

nods You know my opinion on it, too, and who is the 800 lb. gorilla in the corner for every conversation about North Korea. We could roll over that impoverished bomb crater in less time than it took to shatter Iraqs military, but how would—MUST—China react? They quite justifiably consider themselves East Asias dominant power, as they were for most of world history, and our whole regional presence both a challenge and reminder of the "century of humiliation" that did not completely end till they regained Hong Kong. If we went to war with North Korea I doubt China would have any more CHOICE whether to defend their neighboring satellite than we did when forcibly opposing Soviet missile bases in Cuba. Call it the Jiang (or Ji, if one prefers) Corollary to the Roosevelt Corollary to the Monroe Doctrine.

If we fired the first shot (or South Korea fired it on our behalf) we would be the aggressor-state, hence North Koreas decades of extortion: They know we will do nothing. We need them to fire first or it will just be another Iraq and the world will leave us to deal with it alone. That would be fine till China got involved again; then it would be VERY ugly. I think that may be the best case scenario, because our conflict with China involves far more than just North Korea. We could probably still win a conventional war against them, and still have a nuclear trump card, but the longer we wait the more they close the technological and manufacturing gap, while our commitment to missile defense removes the SOLE reason China stopped pursuing MIRVs four decades ago.

That would indeed not end well but, as you say, this situation probably has no positive end game. The problem is convincing the majority of Westerners of that, overcoming the greater consensus things such as a bellum iustum and cassus belli not only do but CANNOT exist. Most people have it deeply ingrained that war, especially its initiation, is the worst of all possible evils, and will not accept that as horrifying as waging a war is, LOSING a war, especially a total war, is worse. I am not convinced WWII made total war obsolete simply because the victor nations have consistently veered away from the risk of losing one since. None have yet faced a situation that left no other option save capitulation.

How I WISH it were just between us and him; that would make life SO much easier for everyone (well, except him.) I wonder if anyone has stopped to consider that nuclear weapons not only give North Korea the means to deter US intervention, but CHINESE intervention as well.

Hypothetical scenario: North Korea comes pouring across the DMZ, China decides, "crap, we better put a stop to this before the US 7th Fleet does it for us," and the PLA comes pouring into North Korea. Which would they nuke first, Beijing, or L.A.? Bearing in mind a nuke fired at L.A. might well not reach its target, and would mainly just guarantee we slagged the whole country, while one fired at Beijing would be a decapitation strike that took... lessee, ~600km from North Korea to Beijing, a Taepodong-2s cruising speed is ~7500m/s, plus 100 seconds for the boost phase... I get 3 minutes, sound right? China and Russia playing nuclear Kwik-E-Mart to the world may have made the conceit of North Korean "independence" reality, and the ultimate price more than anyone wants to pay.

The prospects are so dire I am actually convinced that jackbooted SOB MacArthur was right, and our penultimate genuinely Democratic president wrong. I am not sure Truman could have stared MacArthur down after he conquered all of Asia, which would have produced its own serious problems, but in 1950 the Soviet nuclear weapons program was not half as old as North Koreas now, and we had 50 atomic boms ready to go in the bellies of B-29s. How different would the world be if we had dealt with China then, when they were still allied with the Soviets and before the DMZ, Berlin Wall and Vietnam? We can only wonder, but never know....