North Korea conducts Nuclear Test - Page 6

**WhiskeySix** · 10-11-2006, 06:32 PM

well.. you could set it to go off 1km inland or whatever... (set the destination of the container to be Texas somewhere). Or you could ship it to NYC.

The problem is you couldn't pin the explosion on NK, if they decided to do such a thing... out of the blue New York is gone... I mean.. are we really gonna launch a retaliatory NUCLEAR strike on suspicion alone?

Kerostasis · 10-11-2006, 07:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WhiskeySix

The problem is you couldn't pin the explosion on NK, if they decided to do such a thing... out of the blue New York is gone... I mean.. are we really gonna launch a retaliatory NUCLEAR strike on suspicion alone?

Yes. At least, I damn well hope so. Because the threat of retaliation is the only thing preventing that situation from becoming reality.

**leejo** · 10-11-2006, 07:24 PM

I think that's the concern. "Terror" organizations is too well organized, funded, and trained not to have received at least tacit support from certain governments. They are becoming the poor man's special forces. Being "multi-national" they offer their sponsors plausible deniability. Yes we support Hezbollah but we didn't know they would do THAT. Yes we gave them the fissile material but we arrested the scientist who did it and didn't provide the mechanics. Etc. There are a lot of ways to accomplish the goal without paying the full consequence.

What's the goal? Well if you truly wanted to knock the establishment off its pedestal, how would you do it? I would attempt to both degrade their economies and increase their expenses over time. What impact on the US economy would a nuclear explosion on US soil have? What would be the long term consequences in terms of the added cost and friction of the subsequent additional security? Who would benefit?

Nuclear bombs have always been strategic, not tactical.

Is this crazy thinking? Maybe so. Maybe not. I just don't want KJI to get his paws on one.

Steeler · 10-11-2006, 07:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xTYBALTx

Of course, this is all just semantics - a nuclear weapon going off even near a city is a big deal, but not such a big deal as to significantly destabilize or "set back" a nation the size of America. Point being that you would want that weapon to land in the heart of a city, not in the outskirts. And you would want a target you could hit with confidence.

Plus, there is a major strategic difference between hitting the Pentagon and hitting Bayonne, NJ. Very few military assets could be hit by a Fedex nuke, which is what you'd need to hit to limit our ability to retaliate.

So we're back to square one. Having 1 nuke, or 12, with no reliable or timely delivery system is only useful as a diplomatic deterrent, and not a very good tactical weapon. Unless, of course, as leejo said, you were a non-state actor. But I still think the likelihood of a terrorist network getting a working bomb from NK or even Iran is extremely slim. Remember Cuba? We tied those missiles around Russia's neck. I don't think that gambit could work, even with a distributed network of delivery.

**WhiskeySix** · 10-11-2006, 07:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steeler

Plus, there is a major strategic difference between hitting the Pentagon and hitting Bayonne, NJ. Very few military assets could be hit by a Fedex nuke, which is what you'd need to hit to limit our ability to retaliate.

So we're back to square one. Having 1 nuke, or 12, with no reliable or timely delivery system is only useful as a diplomatic deterrent, and not a very good tactical weapon.

Why couldn't one of those containers be sent to the metro-DC area? They're plucked off the ship, wheels strapped under them, and off they go, right?

Steeler · 10-11-2006, 07:46 PM

You know, I never really thought of DC as a port town, but I guess you're right. How much land clearance is there between a target like the Pentagon and civilian space? I assume that containers don't just get shipped down the road straight off the boat.

**Switchcraft** · 10-11-2006, 11:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steeler

You know, I never really thought of DC as a port town, but I guess you're right. How much land clearance is there between a target like the Pentagon and civilian space? I assume that containers don't just get shipped down the road straight off the boat.

As I have worked on security in that area, I don't feel comfortable talking about specifics in DC. However, I'm thinking back to the Port of Los Angeles thing. The container comes off the ship, and rolls 8km to the Intermodal Container Transfer Facility, which is a huge computer-controlled automated rail terminal that sends containers on trains in all directions...even does a fair bit of business with Mexico. The whole system is automated...if the bomb isn't detected by that point, you could send it anywhere you wanted. EMP may or may not be that big a deal from a small bomb at ground level, but you irradiate all that area, and you render a facility that handles nearly 200 billion dollars in cargo per year kinda worthless. Plus, the psychological impact...set off one bomb in any major port, and how many millions of people who live in port cities around the globe will decide to move?

Lucky Shot · 10-12-2006, 10:53 PM

So they have a nuclear bomb to better impact the population. Maybe they will consider Electricity to be the next technology to go after... Satelite shot at night.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/liv...n_page_id=1811

Lucky Shot

Boot · 10-12-2006, 11:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lucky Shot

Satelite shot at night.

Heh, i came here to post that same pic.

At least they're honest about what the nuclear programs are for. Iran maintains they want nuke technology for electricity. This from a country that has 133 bbl of oil reserves, and currently exports a net 240 million kWh of electricity to other countries (source).

Kerostasis · 10-13-2006, 01:26 AM

When you put it that way...I almost feel safer with a North Korean nuke than I would with an Iranian nuke.

Not that this matters much, since BOTH of them are likely to have functioning nukes in the near future.

xTYBALTx · 10-13-2006, 01:33 AM

Kim Jong Il's house sure is brightly lit!

**WhiskeySix** · 10-13-2006, 11:03 AM

heh, well whadya know:

Bush signs port-security, Internet gaming bill

xTYBALTx · 03-09-2007, 06:10 PM

Looks like Bush might be responsible for North Korea's recent nuclear advances after all.

Quote:

The administration's stance today stands in sharp contrast to the certainty expressed by top officials in 2002, when the administration accused Pyongyang of running a secret uranium program -- and demanded it be dismantled at once. President Bush told a news conference that November: "We discovered that, contrary to an agreement they had with the United States, they're enriching uranium, with a desire of developing a weapon."

The accusation about the alleged uranium program backfired, sparking a series of events that ultimately led to North Korea's first nuclear test -- using another material, plutonium -- nearly five months ago.

aeroripper · 03-09-2007, 06:21 PM

Quote:

Of course, this is all just semantics - a nuclear weapon going off even near a city is a big deal, but not such a big deal as to significantly destabilize or "set back" a nation the size of America. Point being that you would want that weapon to land in the heart of a city, not in the outskirts. And you would want a target you could hit with confidence.

Even if it wasn't massively damaging to infrastructure, the psychological impact of a nuke going off in this country would throw everything off balance. The Feds would go overboard with security measures and probably some sort of a military response (possibily nuclear) would follow (Iran, or some other 'rogue' country).

xTYBALTx · 03-09-2007, 06:36 PM

Indeed.

10-11-2006, 06:32 PM	#76 (permalink)
WhiskeySix Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Gillette Stadium, Section 309, Row 12, Seat 24 Age: 33 Posts: 8,279	Re: North Korea conducts Nuclear Test well.. you could set it to go off 1km inland or whatever... (set the destination of the container to be Texas somewhere). Or you could ship it to NYC. The problem is you couldn't pin the explosion on NK, if they decided to do such a thing... out of the blue New York is gone... I mean.. are we really gonna launch a retaliatory NUCLEAR strike on suspicion alone? __________________ *PoE2 Version 2.5 Overview \| Get started with PoE2 (for free!)*

10-11-2006, 07:24 PM	#78 (permalink)
leejo Join Date: Sep 2003 Age: 39 Posts: 7,722	Re: North Korea conducts Nuclear Test I think that's the concern. "Terror" organizations is too well organized, funded, and trained not to have received at least tacit support from certain governments. They are becoming the poor man's special forces. Being "multi-national" they offer their sponsors plausible deniability. Yes we support Hezbollah but we didn't know they would do THAT. Yes we gave them the fissile material but we arrested the scientist who did it and didn't provide the mechanics. Etc. There are a lot of ways to accomplish the goal without paying the full consequence. What's the goal? Well if you truly wanted to knock the establishment off its pedestal, how would you do it? I would attempt to both degrade their economies and increase their expenses over time. What impact on the US economy would a nuclear explosion on US soil have? What would be the long term consequences in terms of the added cost and friction of the subsequent additional security? Who would benefit? Nuclear bombs have always been strategic, not tactical. Is this crazy thinking? Maybe so. Maybe not. I just don't want KJI to get his paws on one.

10-11-2006, 07:46 PM	#81 (permalink)
Steeler Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Taxachusetts Age: 30 Posts: 2,952	Re: North Korea conducts Nuclear Test You know, I never really thought of DC as a port town, but I guess you're right. How much land clearance is there between a target like the Pentagon and civilian space? I assume that containers don't just get shipped down the road straight off the boat. __________________

10-12-2006, 10:53 PM	#83 (permalink)
Lucky Shot Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 4,639	Re: North Korea conducts Nuclear Test So they have a nuclear bomb to better impact the population. Maybe they will consider Electricity to be the next technology to go after... Satelite shot at night. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/liv...n_page_id=1811 Lucky Shot

10-13-2006, 01:33 AM	#86 (permalink)
xTYBALTx Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 3,852	Re: North Korea conducts Nuclear Test Kim Jong Il's house sure is brightly lit! __________________ Current good song: Justice - Stress "$250,000 a year won't get me to Central Park West."

10-13-2006, 11:03 AM	#87 (permalink)
WhiskeySix Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Gillette Stadium, Section 309, Row 12, Seat 24 Age: 33 Posts: 8,279	Re: North Korea conducts Nuclear Test heh, well whadya know: Bush signs port-security, Internet gaming bill __________________ *PoE2 Version 2.5 Overview \| Get started with PoE2 (for free!)*

03-09-2007, 06:36 PM	#90 (permalink)
xTYBALTx Join Date: Aug 2005 Posts: 3,852	Re: North Korea conducts Nuclear Test Indeed. __________________ Current good song: Justice - Stress "$250,000 a year won't get me to Central Park West."

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
email: Wow Expansion Beta- welcome to the closed beta	luna	World of Warcraft - General Discussion	18	10-30-2006 03:55 PM
North Korea: 'Mushroom cloud was not a nuclear explosion. Ignore people with 3 heads.	_Ender_	The Sandbox	2	09-14-2004 03:20 PM
Wow stress test sign up	Polska	General Discussion	45	09-12-2004 06:31 PM

Sponsored links

Sponsored links

Sponsored links