"Resolved: North Korea poses a more serious threat to United States national security than Iran."

I will keep this as simple and straight-forward as possible. My opening argument rests on three points: Who can deal the more serious damage? Who is more likely to do so? Who has a motive to do so? 1. Military status Obviously, a direct threat is more serious than an indirect one. In order to pose a direct threat to the USA, another nation would need the means to inflict considerable damage to US citizens in their own country. Indirect damage would be dealt to allies and military installations abroad, those will mainly cause strategic losses, destabilizing the power balance. This is not to say that I would disregard the lives of our armed forces there. But soldiers ultimately know that their lives are at stake, and they take that risk FOR the safety of those at home. A direct hit with a nuclear missile in their home country hits THEM at the core of their existence, since they could NOT offer that protection, while AT THE SAME TIME costing countless lives home in the US. Surely, we must consider this the more severe threat. Iran is located more than 6500 miles away from the US. [1] The farthest their best carrier missiles could fly is 2000 kilometers or about 1200 miles. [2] So far, NO NUCLEAR WEAPONS have been found in possession of Iran. It would take them 1.7 months to generate the enriched uranium needed for a single warhead from their supply of uranium [3]. And while rumors about a hidden nuclear weapons program persist, so far Iran has presented only conventional weaponry, which is "a collection of knockoffs, junk and gear suited for display only." [4] Military actions taken against the USA have been few and of no critical threat: "Iran recently appeared to overstate its conventional military power when it claimed to be sending two warships toward U.S. waters — one of which barely survived a 1988 run-in with an American fighter jet. The ships ... are believed to have turned back early into their journey." [4] North Korea, on the other hand, "claims it can already hit the continental United States with nuclear warheads. U.S. and South Korean technical assessments, including from recovered North Korean long-range missiles, indicate that Pyongyang has or could shortly attain that capability." [2] North Korea is in possession of missiles with a range of 10000 miles, enough to cover most of the continental USA: The Taepo-Dong 2 missile was successfully tested in 2012, when the very same type of missile was used to launch a satellite into orbit. [5] Nuclear bombs have been successfully tested three times in North Korea, a fourth test has been announced [6], showing that North Korea has the full potential for a nuclear attack, far ahead of anything Iran currently holds. But how likely is an attack anyway? Obviously, the government of each country would have to order an attack, so let's have a look at the hands that will figuratively have to "pull the trigger". 2. Leadership The government system of Iran is a bureaucratic maze [7], created to grant stability. While there is a religious and political "Supreme Leader" who can single-handedly declare war, he can be dismissed by an "Assembly of Leadership Experts", elected by popular vote. Foreign policy is usually in the hands of the President, who can be dismissed by the Leader/Parliament. [8] Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and President Hassan Rouhani, current leaders, have gone to great lengths to negotiate peacefully with the USA. Khamenei strictly defended Rouhani's decision to take up negotiations on a peaceful nuclear program, knowing that if these fail, "the country must stand on its own feet" [9]. Negotiations are ongoing, and the US and Iran now share a common threat they are considering to face together, basically making them (uneasy) allies in the making: the Sunni insurgents in Iraq. [10] Even under far more aggressive president Ahminejad, actual REACTIONS to perceived provocations were limited to speeches before the UN and minor threats. On an interesting side note, the film "Argo" was met with outrage in Iran, but even the announced legal action against the film [11] was never taken. The affair just settled down. North Korea is a military dictatorship. Their major policy is called "military first" [12], and Kim Jong-un is "Supreme commander" [12], with the single authority to launch any attack he sees fit. [13] Kim Jong-un is known for a volatile temper. The US government has confirmed reports of his personality being "dangerous, unpredictable, prone to violence and with delusions of grandeur". [14] In comparison to Iran's moderate approach to media provocations, Kim famously called the film "The Interview" an "act of war" [15] and threatened merciless retaliation. Kim Jong-un's policy closely follows that of his father [16], who is revered in North Korea as "the eternal sun" [17], making it almost impossible for Kim Jong-un to step out of his shadow without losing respect. And that policy included the 2010 UNPROVOKED sinking of a South Korean ship, killing 46 sailors, and bombardment of a South Korean Island, killing two soldiers. [18] With Kim-Jong-un's alleged willingness to order killings, even of his own uncle and his entire family [19], it is almost impossible to predict his actions, making his reign a greater risk for the US national security. Finally, we have to ask ourselves: why would an attack on the US be launched anyway? 3. Diplomatic relations and political goals As shown above, Iran is at present potentially interested in allying with the US to fight the Iraq insurgence. Iran is caught up in three such conflicts, currently: against the PJAK [20], in the Syrian civil war [21] and against ISIS in the Iraqi uprising [22]. Iran is trying to uphold its status quo, for political and religious reasons. Attacking the USA at this point would mean a huge disadvantage for them. Only if a nuclear treaty can be reached, Iran will avoid further conflict in the region about an alleged nuclear military program. The US are opposed to ISIS and make for a far better ally at the moment than anyone else. Iran has nothing to gain from attacking the US. In North Korea, we have a totally different situation: Kim follows three prime goals: acceptance as nuclear weapons state[16][23], removal of US forces from the Korean peninsula [23] and reunification with South Korea. [23] North Korean propaganda [17] rests heavily on military prestige, which is why Kim is Supreme Commander. In order to outshine his late father, Kim Jong-un is likely to strive for a military triumph. A nuclear strike against the USA would be seen as an act of glory, showing strength against the "imperialist" front-runner who has so far been the only one to ever employ nuclear weapons in a war. This would be the ultimate justice, delivered by their glorious leader. [1] http://tinyurl.com... [2] http://tinyurl.com... [3] http://tinyurl.com... [4] http://tinyurl.com... [5] http://tinyurl.com... [6] http://tinyurl.com... [7] http://tinyurl.com... [8] http://tinyurl.com... [9] http://tinyurl.com... [10] http://tinyurl.com... [11] http://tinyurl.com... [12] http://tinyurl.com... [13] http://tinyurl.com... [14] http://tinyurl.com... [15] http://tinyurl.com... [16] http://tinyurl.com... [17] http://tinyurl.com... [18] http://tinyurl.com... [19] http://tinyurl.com... [20] http://tinyurl.com... [21] http://tinyurl.com... [22] http://tinyurl.com... [23] http://tinyurl.com...