War in Korea?

[LordWolf]

Correct + even if they would do something stupid, I doubt it that some other country will retaliate with a nuclear attack. I think no superpower can justify the use of nuclear weapons at the moment. The only nuclear danger comes from some nuke lost in the wrong hands.

Uuh, you do know that nearly any kind of missile can hold nuclear payload.

I'm very sure the north koreans have low / med range missiles capable of delivering the payload. The real problem is the nuclear bomb itself, even if they managed to do something the power is probably that of an early nuclear bomb, which are not very powerfull compared to todays arsenal.

 

In any event, im not sure how usa would respond, i'm quite sure people havent forgotten Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and would probably try to get peaceful resolution even if a nuclear bomb is used. (wusses)

[asparagin]

In any event, im not sure how usa would respond, i'm quite sure people havent forgotten Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and would probably try to get peaceful resolution even if a nuclear bomb is used. (wusses)

 

I don't think they'll use nukes, but I also don't think they'll be peaceful. In such a case, NK should be immobilized, and fast. All speculations of course.

[EtherealN]

Uuh, you do know that nearly any kind of missile can hold nuclear payload.

 

Yes, but only if the warhead has been sufficiently miniaturized. You can look at early soviet ICBM's as an example: they had failed (at that point) to conduct sufficient minituarization of the warheads, so the missiles had to be extremely large (incidentally large enough to be pressed into service in putting Sputnik into orbit). Similarly the Titan rockets sometimes used for LOE insertion of satellites is a derivative of a nuke carrier - but even though they were designed for miniaturized warheads they're bigger than the Taepodong series of missiles. (Though Taepodong-2 is starting to be impressive and if they can just make a launch that anyone except themselves says was successful... :P )

 

I'm very sure the north koreans have low / med range missiles capable of delivering the payload.

 

Which payload? What's the weight and size of an NK nuke? Neither you nor I know, wherefore it is very difficult to say anything about their capabilities.

 

Again, we know they've run tests and the last one probably managed to achieve an actual nuclear explosion (but at very low yield, so possibly a fizzle). But going from there to weaponization is not easy.

 

Here's an example picture of american early experimental stuff: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ivy_Mike_Sausage_device.jpg

 

Good luck putting that on a missile. (Though granted - that's a thermonuke, not a simple fission nuke.)

 

Further, if we assume that it's regular implosion nukes, similar to Fat Man, which might be somewhat right considering that it's "entry level" nuklear weapons technology-wise, then we have a package weighing in at over 4000 kilos. Taepodong-2 payload at short range is speculated (speculation's all that's available, obviously) at around 1000 kilos. Taepodong one would also not get close, and the Rodong would carry even less.

 

So seriously, I have very high doubts that they'd be able to put a nuke on a missile. They might be able to do so if they get 5 years or so more, and this might just be a show of force to buy them some time in the weaponization programme after which the regime can feel "safe". They could probably make a literal bomb, but flying one of their heavier bombers into a target area without getting shot down is a dicy proposition even if they do so en-masse.

[Boberro]

I am very concerned. All I know is if any other country to be included in conflict in any way it will be disastrous for the planet. We have never been closer to nuclear war. God help us.

 

We've been many times, earlier.

[LordWolf]

Correct + even if they would do something stupid, I doubt it that some other country will retaliate with a nuclear attack. I think no superpower can justify the use of nuclear weapons at the moment. The only nuclear danger comes from some nuke lost in the wrong hands.

 

Yes, but only if the warhead has been sufficiently miniaturized. You can look at early soviet ICBM's as an example: they had failed (at that point) to conduct sufficient minituarization of the warheads, so the missiles had to be extremely large (incidentally large enough to be pressed into service in putting Sputnik into orbit). Similarly the Titan rockets sometimes used for LOE insertion of satellites is a derivative of a nuke carrier - but even though they were designed for miniaturized warheads they're bigger than the Taepodong series of missiles. (Though Taepodong-2 is starting to be impressive and if they can just make a launch that anyone except themselves says was successful... :P )

 

 

 

Which payload? What's the weight and size of an NK nuke? Neither you nor I know, wherefore it is very difficult to say anything about their capabilities.

 

Again, we know they've run tests and the last one probably managed to achieve an actual nuclear explosion (but at very low yield, so possibly a fizzle). But going from there to weaponization is not easy.

 

Here's an example picture of american early experimental stuff: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ivy_Mike_Sausage_device.jpg

 

Good luck putting that on a missile. (Though granted - that's a thermonuke, not a simple fission nuke.)

 

Further, if we assume that it's regular implosion nukes, similar to Fat Man, which might be somewhat right considering that it's "entry level" nuklear weapons technology-wise, then we have a package weighing in at over 4000 kilos. Taepodong-2 payload at short range is speculated (speculation's all that's available, obviously) at around 1000 kilos. Taepodong one would also not get close, and the Rodong would carry even less.

 

So seriously, I have very high doubts that they'd be able to put a nuke on a missile. They might be able to do so if they get 5 years or so more, and this might just be a show of force to buy them some time in the weaponization programme after which the regime can feel "safe". They could probably make a literal bomb, but flying one of their heavier bombers into a target area without getting shot down is a dicy proposition even if they do so en-masse.

 

It's not like they dont have allies. For a reasonable price i'm sure they got some nifty scientists involved and are using borowed technology. (Probably Chinese/Russian). I don't see it unlikley that they even bought a nuke from Russians, since they usualy dont give a ****...

[GGTharos]

So you think that neither Russia nor China care if a nuclear exchange erupts near their borders?

[LordWolf]

So you think that neither Russia nor China care if a nuclear exchange erupts near their borders?

As long as they get paid...

[GGTharos]

... by 'I got no money' Kim?

 

I think you haven't thought any of this through. No one wants people brandishing nukes on their border. Perhaps you'd like some confrontation prone nut next door to buy a gun from you - so long as you get paid - or are you implying that those countries don't care about their own national security?

 

As long as they get paid...

[LordWolf]

... by 'I got no money' Kim?

 

I think you haven't thought any of this through. No one wants people brandishing nukes on their border. Perhaps you'd like some confrontation prone nut next door to buy a gun from you - so long as you get paid - or are you implying that those countries don't care about their own national security?

Kim has a lot of money, he exploits all of natural ritches in his country, and they all go to him.

 

Well then, tell me, who are the biggest arms sellers in the world? As long as they have neutral / peacefull relationships, they dont care. I'm sure some corupt general would love to hand out his stocks in order to gain his retierment money...

[Steel Jaw]

There will be no nuclear exchanges. Nobody wins. Even fools like The Dim Leader know this.

 

Anyhow, just put a line of McDonalds and Burger Kings along the DMZ...the NKs will be delayed there for days.

[GGTharos]

He doesn't. He's spending it all on modernizing the military, and quite frankly I think your wish for those countries to be that corrupt is somewhat transparent.

 

FYI, these countries shoot traitors, almost on sight.

 

Kim has a lot of money, he exploits all of natural ritches in his country, and they all go to him.

 

Well then, tell me, who are the biggest arms sellers in the world? As long as they have neutral / peacefull relationships, they dont care. I'm sure some corupt general would love to hand out his stocks in order to gain his retierment money...

[LordWolf]

He doesn't. He's spending it all on modernizing the military, and quite frankly I think your wish for those countries to be that corrupt is somewhat transparent.

 

FYI, these countries shot traitors, almost on sight.

 

fix'd

[asparagin]

As long as they get paid...

 

China and Russia voted for UN sanctions against NK after nuclear test.

[asparagin]

Anyhow, just put a line of McDonalds and Burger Kings along the DMZ...the NKs will be delayed there for days.

 

:D but I think even NK's know that's not healthy for them

[GGTharos]

Fixed what? They still do this.

 

fix'd

[Steel Jaw]

Fixed what? They still do this.

 

Of course they do. They have a long history of violating their citizens' natural rights.

[EtherealN]

Kim has a lot of money, he exploits all of natural ritches in his country, and they all go to him.

 

...yet neither Russia nor China sold technology to the NK regime, they had to kickstart their nuclear programme through buying from a gone-private Pakistani. (This has been documented, you know...)

 

Well then, tell me, who are the biggest arms sellers in the world?

 

The United States takes first place by wide margin, then it's Russia, and the only known case of either selling nuclear stuff is the US selling some missiles for the british SSBN's.

 

I'm sure some corupt general would love to hand out his stocks in order to gain his retierment money...

 

You make the mistake of assuming that Russian and Chinese generals are corrupt enough to hand out nuclear secrets - something that they'd be given the death penalty for. And besides, if they had bought nukes, how come their first test was a definite fizzle and the second so weak it was a possible fizzle? All evidence suggests that they aren't even quite at the level of the Manhattan Project around the Trinity test, while evidence for your conspiracy is absolutely zero with lots of points against it.

 

Also, it should be noted that both China and Russia do have dependencies on trade with South Korea, simply because it is a very major player on several semiconductor markets - an area in which both said contries lag behind (though mainly because they never had a really major focus on it). Your whole argument assumes that either the countries themselves should be suicidal, or some suicidal general would somehow get access to nukes and be able to cart them off. Nukes are guarded a little more closely than some random officer driving in with a truck for some late-night shopping, you know. It's not your random box of AK-47 ammo or RPG-7 rounds collecting dust in a warehouse guarded by a sole bored conscript... ;)

[LordWolf]

...yet neither Russia nor China sold technology to the NK regime, they had to kickstart their nuclear programme through buying from a gone-private Pakistani. (This has been documented, you know...)

 

 

 

The United States takes first place by wide margin, then it's Russia, and the only known case of either selling nuclear stuff is the US selling some missiles for the british SSBN's.

 

 

 

You make the mistake of assuming that Russian and Chinese generals are corrupt enough to hand out nuclear secrets - something that they'd be given the death penalty for. And besides, if they had bought nukes, how come their first test was a definite fizzle and the second so weak it was a possible fizzle? All evidence suggests that they aren't even quite at the level of the Manhattan Project around the Trinity test, while evidence for your conspiracy is absolutely zero with lots of points against it.

 

Also, it should be noted that both China and Russia do have dependencies on trade with South Korea, simply because it is a very major player on several semiconductor markets - an area in which both said contries lag behind (though mainly because they never had a really major focus on it). Your whole argument assumes that either the countries themselves should be suicidal, or some suicidal general would somehow get access to nukes and be able to cart them off. Nukes are guarded a little more closely than some random officer driving in with a truck for some late-night shopping, you know. It's not your random box of AK-47 ammo or RPG-7 rounds collecting dust in a warehouse guarded by a sole bored conscript... ;)

 

It's a devils proof (Probatio diabolica). You can't deny that it could happen!

[asparagin]

You can't deny that it could happen!

 

A lot of things could happen including the action-film bibliography of the last 40 years. Let's stick to what could really happen.

[EtherealN]

LordWolf, there could be a celestial teapot the size of the moon headed straight for us, making all our safety concerns moot.

 

You can't deny it could happen! ;)

 

Probatio Diabolica is not something you use in logic when trying to figure out likely future events, it's a legal term describing situations where the normal burden of proof becomes impossible.

[LordWolf]

Let's stick to what could really happen.

Yeah, not like the north korea is crazy enough to get their hands on nuclear bombs right..

I mean, it's not like they have them... right?...

[EtherealN]

LordWolf, that's the entire point: we don't know if they have "nuclear bombs".

 

What we know is this:

1 - They bought some designs from a pakistani spy who had "gone private".

2 - They ran a test, that fizzled.

3 - They ran another test, that made a bigger bang but still weak enough that it might have been a fizzle.

 

...nowhere have we seen a bomb. We've seen test devices that doesn't seem to have worked quite right, and we've seen missile tests that didn't quite work right either.

 

You need to understand that a nuclear test is not the same as a finished and weaponized physics package. And a failed or partially failed test is even further away from it.

[LordWolf]

LordWolf, that's the entire point: we don't know if they have "nuclear bombs".

 

What we know is this:

1 - They bought some designs from a pakistani spy who had "gone private".

2 - They ran a test, that fizzled.

3 - They ran another test, that made a bigger bang but still weak enough that it might have been a fizzle.

 

...nowhere have we seen a bomb. We've seen test devices that doesn't seem to have worked quite right, and we've seen missile tests that didn't quite work right either.

 

You need to understand that a nuclear test is not the same as a finished and weaponized physics package. And a failed or partially failed test is even further away from it.

How about this then...

You can't prove that they haven't bought/made a nuclear warhead from other countries. At the same time, you can't say that they have.

So in that way, you have to claim that they both have and don't have a weapon capable of flattering a whole city. It's bascly a Schrodinger's box, in a way, that you have to hope for the best, but prepair for the worse!

(Either way, the only way to prove that i'm wrong is to peek inside the box, that means to prove that they defenetly don't own it, which at the current regime is nearly impossible...)

[EtherealN]

No, that's broken logic.

 

Does sweden have nuclear weapons? You can't prove it does, you can't prove it doesn't! So you have to claim sweden has nuclear weapons!

 

Indeed, you have to claim everyone has nuclear weapons. And you have to claim no-one has them.

[RIPTIDE]

Of course they do. They have a long history of violating their citizens' natural rights.

I'll be devils advocate here for just second. Until the late 80's SOuth Korea was a brutal dictatorship. Indeed they have massacred tens if not hundreds of thousands of their own people during and after the Korean War. Ya.. I'm talking about South Korea. And I'm not taking about Collateral War damage either. I'm talking about rounding up and killing politcal prisoners. It wasn't until the 90's that the north Went down the drain. And then they really went belly up. Not until the 90's did the South decide to switch over to Democracy.

 

And here's one more thing, while most Americans and the West in general support South Korea, most South Koreans have a deep dislike of America because of their support and encouragement of the aforementioned dictatorship.