I don't think it's about support, it's about necessity. If the North stops posturing and decides to attack the South with as much might as it can muster the US would have to respond due to its interests in the region, whether it has our support or not. A nation that has significant interests in the region and has troops on the soil being attacked is going to respond no matter what and that goes for any nation that has the power to dictate on that scale. But lets be realistic a full scale war between those nations isn't going to be good for anyone no matter the result. Even if the North is toppled upwards of a million people (it's estimated) will have died in the process and that's not even taking into account what happens if China gets involved, or if it goes nuclear. And thoughts of creating a unified Korea (as I'm sure people are bound to do) aren't too productive either, given the complete polar opposites the two societies currently operate under and the generations of propaganda thrown back and forth. The South I would posit, probably don't even want to unify, it has a good thing going in its current situation taking on board another few million people is going to create havoc for its infrastructure.
At least someone who understands power and interest.
Documents on WikiLeaks show that China doesn't have a problem with a reunified Korea even if it's the south that wins.
And I believe WMD have nothing to do with it. WMD are for deterrence only, if anyone will ever use them they will be blown to bits by the rest, especially if that one is NK.
Like I said in another topic, I think this is just some muscle flexing to smooth the transition of power in NK. Read Machiavelli's Il Principe everyone.