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

=Framework= This resolution can go two ways, first in assessing the direct threats posed by either state, and balancing against their indirect threats. It will be my position within this debate that indirect threats are significantly more potent and realistic. The indirect threats of Iran can be assessed in the following departments, which I will affirm within this debate: 1. Strategic Military & Economical Influence 2. Impact on US Allies 3. Public disorder/confidence 4. Terrorism Groups 1. Direct Threats 1.1 Nuclear Weapon Threats Neither Iran, nor North Korea are a threat to the US simply by virtue of mutually assured destruction (MAD). Any nuclear launch by either nation upon the US will result in the recipient nation being razed by the rapid counter-attack capabilities of the installed systems stationed in South Korea and surrounding areas.[ http://www.japanfocus.org...] Thus, even if we assumed either one or the other had full-nuclear strike capabilities on the US, then there still remains no significant threat upon US national security. We have no reason to believe North Korea even has that capability, simply possessing nuclear weapons and long range missiles does not mean the two are married together. A compact enough nuclear device needs to be developed first (which we havbe no evidence of North Korea having), and then missile guiding technologies developed to the point where a hit can be made with confidence.[ http://armscontrolcenter.org..., http://www.bloomberg.com...] Both of which are estimated to be many years off for North Korea. The development of strike capabilities is even less likely in light of China’s public protestations to North Korea’s advances, which is significant since China remains North Korea’s sole prominent international ally and main trading partner. North Korea would effectively be committing economical suicide by going against China.[ http://www.japanfocus.org...] While I will quickly concede that no nuclear weapons have yet been confirmed of Iran, what has been confirmed is Iran’s possession of 13,397 kg of low-enriched uranium (3.5% U-235), of which 8,390 kg is in gaseous form for further enrichment, which is sufficient for seven nuclear warheads with further enrichment (requiring 90% enriched uranium). It’s existing centrifuge facilities (first and second generation centrifuges) are known to be capable of producing one nuclear bomb’s worth of weapon’s grade uranium within 12 months if the government so chose. According to a 2012 IAEA report Iran had produced ~280kg of 20% enriched uranium, a significant step in the direction of nuclear weapon’s grade capability.[ http://www.iaea.org...] Mark Hibbs, nuclear policy expert puts this into perspective: “once you're at 20%, you're about 80% of the way there”[ http://edition.cnn.com...] 1.2 Conventional Weapon Threats 2. Indirect Threats 2.1 Strait of Hormuz About 40% of the world’s tanker borne oil passes through the Strait of Hormuz, needless to say any disruption to this would leads to catastrophic economic consequences to the US, for which Iran is in a powerful strategic position to close.[ https://www.fas.org...] A 2012 report by CRS affirms: “An outright closure of the Strait of Hormuz, a major artery of the global oil market, would be an unprecedented disruption of global oil supply and contribute to higher global oil prices.” Moreover, Iran is also in a strategic position to harass tanker traffic leading to similar consequences without needing to outright close the strait. This would also leads to higher levels of uncertainty of oil supply, increased shipping costs, etc. 2.2 Terrorist Groups Iran is known to financially support terrorism groups, including Hamas, Hezbollah, and others. This is severe when coupled with a nuclear threat. This is because while Iran and North Korea are tied in it’s use of nuclear weapons due to MAD, terrorist groups are not, simply by virtue of these groups “not having a return address” as non-state actors. Moreover the moral, and stability of these groups are dubious at best, and hence the efficacy of MAD is questionable at best when these groups are considered. As such, purely by virtue of Iran’s potential to supply nuclear weapons to non-state actors leads to Iran presenting a significantly greater threat to the US than Korea ever could with nuclear weapons.[ http://www.fpri.org...] Moreover, long-range delivery systems are not required when acts of terrorism are accounted for and non-aircraft or missile based deliveries are considered. This also negates the requirement for nuclear testing of said bombs before use, due to the primitive detonation mechanisms (cf. Gun-Type).[ http://www.americanthinker.com...] ConclusionSorry for the rushed round. it's Christmas! Have a good one!!!