i get high sometimes

I'll disregard your first statement. Elementary school textbooks don't count as scholarly historical literature.

"I don't think North Korea's leaders aren't really stupid enough to start a war against what is essentially the U.N"

Well, assuming the double negative is intentional, you are saying that you believe North Korea's leaders are stupid enough to start a war with what is essentially the U.N (?). Which is obviously absurd. What North Korea has is a nuclear deterrant. It is the same thing that kept the world out of oblivion during the Cold War. Other nations realize that defying American desire for global hegemony is dangerous, and nuclear deterrant is needed to avoid becoming the Phillipines. This is the reason why Iran agreed to stop its enrichment of uranium for military purposes in an agreement with the E.U., in exchange for unilateral protection in the event of an attack (aka, when the United States invades us because they don't like the way we run our country, we need you to back us up). Of course, this agreement was blocked by the E.U. under pressure by the United States.

So, if it is true that Kim Jong Il is a complete lunatic who wants nothing more than to end the world, why hasn't he launched a nuclear assualt on Japan? He has developed nuclear missiles with the capability of reaching mainland Japan, whose only source of defense in the event of an attack is the United States due to the demilitarization of Japan after World War II. So, if it is Kim Jong Ils desire to randomly end the world, and thus, his reign and life, why hasn't he attacked Japan? The answer is obvious, Kim Jong Il does not have any desire to end the world, and he also has no desire to engage in war with the United States, which is the reason he is proliferating nuclear arms in the first place. Your insinuation that he wants to start a war with the international community, more specifically a nuclear war with the international community, is irrational to anyone with an ounce of common sense.


Back to my inclusion of parenthesis around the question mark at the point where you claim that a war against the US would essentially be a war against the UN. Why would you say that? Because it sounded intelligent or something? The United States has essentially lost international support. Obviously, however, if Kim Jong Il were to launch a nuclear assualt against the United States, it wouldn't be a war at all. It would be armageddon.


So anyway, what books have you read on the subject?

EDIT:
You mean there is a winner in a nuclear war? Is that the side that burns to death last, or what?