Please don't comment about the voting on comments. It never does any good, and it makes boring reading.
Even ignoring this aspect, there are two reasons for not waging a war to NK:
1. NK is under China's protection, primarily for acting as buffer country (this is a valid political reason)
2. NK does have offensive power; even without nuclear warheads, due to geographical positioning, it can do a huge amount of damange to SK.But to be fair, I have no answer to the question if ignoring abuses as "internal affairs" is the better option. A very complex problem indeed.
If you have waterborne disease like that it's always a sign of inadequate infrastructure.
> to be fair there has been plenty of justification for humanitarian intervention in NK for the past 60 years
Broadly agree to that. Amazing that we're finally opening our eyes to that at this particular point in history, isn't it.
Then there's the question of how history will view the rest of us for looking the other way while the Kims turned an entire country into a concentration camp.
That's another question entirely. Imagine if we'd left Auschwitz up and running at the end of WWII.
This is more like titillation wrapped-up in a respectable jacket of 'serious current affairs' to get some clicks.