|
This has kind of forced the US's hand now. As NK have a fully fledged ICBM well in advance of what anyone was expecting. Given they are a lot more advanced on the rocket front than thought, its probably going to worry SK, Japan and the US that if they were wrong on the rocket front then they might be wrong on NK's nuclear program and that is is also more advanced than expected.
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2017 18:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 16:17 |
|
|
Stairmaster posted:there's a fair chance he'll spend like a minute burning to death. If you're on fire you probably already had your brain liquified by the pressure blast
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2017 18:31
|
|
|
Grouchio posted:How are our anti-ballistic defense systems doing? Uh, you know those are designed for maybe knocking a few dozen missiles out of incoming waves of thousands of missiles to staunch the damage slightly, not to hit a single missile on its own right? Furthermore, under terms of 1960s and 1970s arms agreements, the Soviet and American agreements were to only build small amounts of systems in constrained ares - US using its allocation to defend plains nuclear launch sites and USSR placing most of it around Moscow. And since those times most of both those systems are offline entirely.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2017 19:29
|
|
|
Vishass posted:If you're on fire you probably already had your brain liquified by the pressure blast 1+MT bombs can turn you extra-crispy quite a ways out from the fatal blast area. You're right for NK's current dinky ~20-60kT bombs. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2017 20:42
|
|
|
Dr Strangelove was a documentary wasn't it? If so, then I'm rather looking forward to The End. Someone will need to tell me where I have to register to get my Cowboy hat.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2017 20:52
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/ReutersWorld/status/891006877764636672
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2017 21:49
|
|
|
This is fairly routine - they obviously need to get everyone in a room and discuss the possibilities when things change significantly like this.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2017 22:15
|
|
|
Btw, the ABM system in Moscow is run and running. If anything it could be argued to be one of the few ABM systems that can readily handle ICBMs in their terminal phase. The fact it uses nuclear warheads if anything makes it unique. The US unilaterally got rid of theirs in the 1970s, and then withdrew from the ABM treaty entirely to develop the GMD system....which still doesn't work. (The Russians in response withdrew from portions of Start II to retain their MIRVs.) Ardennes fucked around with this message at 23:33 on Jul 28, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2017 23:30
|
|
|
Looks like Moon Jae-In just unfroze THAAD deployment and is in talks to deploy even more. http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr/news/2017/07/29/0200000000AEN20170729001200315.html Fojar38 fucked around with this message at 23:40 on Jul 28, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2017 23:37
|
|
|
Fojar38 posted:Looks like Moon Jae-In just unfroze THAAD deployment and is in talks to deploy even more. https://mobile.twitter.com/aldin_ww...%3D4033%23pti32 https://mobile.twitter.com/aldin_ww...%3D4033%23pti32 Yeah shits pretty scary.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2017 23:52
|
|
|
Sunshine Policy 2.0 lasted 3 months
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2017 00:33
|
|
|
Fojar38 posted:Sunshine Policy 2.0 lasted 3 months Jong un isn't his dad or his grandfather. He has very different plans for the country and he's made that abundantly clear at this point.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2017 02:51
|
|
|
For the morbidly curious: nuclear impact effects map Another real risk is that this pushes South Korea and Japan to develop their own nukes. Even assuming everyone stays calm and rational until humanity unites peacefully a million years from now, more nukes in more hands means more opportunity to make mistakes.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2017 02:51
|
|
|
More likely than South Korea and Japan developing their own nukes is a drastic acceleration in the deployment of missile defense systems in both countries. South Korea and Japan's fundamental calculus here won't have changed too much since they've been in range of North Korean nukes for a while now; what's changed in that regard is that it has become abundantly clear that diplomacy has failed. Even Moon seems to be conceding that.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2017 02:58
|
|
|
Diplomacy works when there is leverage, in this case neither SK or the West really have any and hasn't had any for a while. The first sunshine policy lasted for as long as it did since North Korea was in such desperate straits it needed any type of influx of cash to survive, now (thanks to China) it doesn't. If anything it made more sense for Jong-Un to push towards an ICBM once they worked out getting a second stage to work.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2017 06:48
|
|
|
Ardennes posted:Btw, the ABM system in Moscow is run and running. If anything it could be argued to be one of the few ABM systems that can readily handle ICBMs in their terminal phase. The fact it uses nuclear warheads if anything makes it unique. Nuking the incoming nuke in the face sounds like the most reliable means of shooting it down, really. quote:The US unilaterally got rid of theirs in the 1970s, and then withdrew from the ABM treaty entirely to develop the GMD system....which still doesn't work. Didn't the US plans for B-52 attacks involve "and also, give it a shitload of nuclear tipped air-to-air missiles to fire in the general direction of any MIGs" at one point?
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2017 07:01
|
|
I CANNOT EJACULATE WITHOUT SEEING NATIVE AMERICANS BRUTALISED!
|
Wouldn't nuking a nuke cause an emp blast to disable and fry electronics across the region it's detonated in?
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2017 07:19
|
|
|
You've been playing a little too much Modern Warfare. They gotta blow up above the visual horizon to do that crap, for a start.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2017 07:24
|
|
|
blowfish posted:Nuking the incoming nuke in the face sounds like the most reliable means of shooting it down, really. It is, although I am sure you could eventually saturate Moscow's defenses. That said, the whole point of the system is to make an attacker have to use a larger part of its arsenal, and possibly buy the government/population some time. That whole premise of Metro 2033 about the Moscow metro system being a bunker system in disguise isn't a joke.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2017 07:33
|
|
|
WarpedNaba posted:You've been playing a little too much Modern Warfare.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2017 07:36
|
|
|
Grouchio posted:Wouldn't nuking a nuke cause an emp blast to disable and fry electronics across the region it's detonated in? As already said to hit an incoming nuke you would have to intercept it a long way out due to the speed, but also the trajectory would mean that where you would be detonating the defensive nuke would be in the perfect EMP generating height >60KM. Its why any defensive nukes would have to be ones designed to limit the amount of gamma radiation so as to try and limit the EMP effects but even so that would not be really successful given the experience in the 40's 50's and 60's with EMP showed that even just small blasts at that altitude produce colossal EMP effects. Its why its worrying that NK now has a nuclear delivery system as the most primitive thermonuclear weapons are generally very high Gamma yield and perfect for a nuclear EMP weapon, so if NK wanted to really gently caress over the US its not far off the technology or the means to do so. ukle fucked around with this message at 08:05 on Jul 29, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2017 08:03
|
|
|
Grouchio posted:Oh thank god. How do they work then? Et Voila
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2017 11:02
|
|
|
That said, I wonder if as far as the Moscow system goes, the thinking is that the missile will likely be heading from the West or the North, and by the time the interceptors engage they would be either outside the borders of the Russian Federation (to the West/NW) or over relatively unpopulated areas close to the Arctic Circle (to the North/NE). It would be interesting to see the math of that especially considering how fast current Russian interceptors are designed to go. Ardennes fucked around with this message at 12:05 on Jul 29, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2017 11:37
|
|
|
Grouchio posted:Oh thank god. How do they work then? The same way anti-air weaponry has worked for a century: you hope you can get your projectile close enough to the target that the target gets caught in the blast radius and physically destroyed by the explosion or shrapnel. If you use a really big bomb (like a nuke) in your defense system, then the accuracy requirements are lowered because you don't have to get as close to get within the kill-radius of the explosion.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2017 13:58
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:The same way anti-air weaponry has worked for a century: you hope you can get your projectile close enough to the target that the target gets caught in the blast radius and physically destroyed by the explosion or shrapnel. If you use a really big bomb (like a nuke) in your defense system, then the accuracy requirements are lowered because you don't have to get as close to get within the kill-radius of the explosion. Note: "accuracy requirements are lowered" doesn't mean "15 km miss, lol still dead". iirc nuclear air-to-air weapons were expected to toast things within maybe a few hundred meters.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2017 14:12
|
|
|
What actually happens is the neutron flux from the exploding interceptor nuke causes the plutonium in the incoming nuke to fission spontaneously in an uncontrolled manner. This causes either a fissile or a severely reduced yield if it survives the run to the target. Also IIRC, the neutrons and stuff from the defensive nuke might gently caress with the precision electronics in the incoming warhead in a big way.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2017 17:32
|
|
|
If a North Korean ICBM hit the north side of Chicago, people on the southside would not be killed by the blast. There is a world of difference between a 5-10 kt nuke and a 20mt nuke that the big boys play with. In order to have a nuclear war with the US, North Korea needs to develop fusion weapons in the megaton range, improve their guidance systems to the point they can actually hit something (not even the Russians have perfected this like the US has, only the US can reliably hit actual targets as opposed to just launching enough firepower to destroy the whole area). And finally, the North Koreans would need several hundred nukes pointed at the US...... just like the Russians and Chinese can do already. Even if by some miracle, NK manages to achieve tech parity with the US, its economy cannot support the maintance of hundreds of Nukes. Look at a map of the US, at the hundreds of mid to large cites and the hundreds of military and industrial areas, and realise that North Korea might be able to partially destroy ONE of them. You are in no danger. North Korea cannot wage war against the US, it cannot use nuclear blackmail against the US. Both would invite destruction. The entire point of this missile program is to send a message of "don't gently caress with us". North Korea is afraid. Unfortuantly, due to the fear mongering, the US if probably about to start loving with them.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2017 18:06
|
|
|
Bishounen Bonanza posted:If a North Korean ICBM hit the north side of Chicago, people on the southside would not be killed by the blast. I don't think anyone would give a poo poo in that scenario.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2017 18:09
|
|
|
Bishounen Bonanza posted:If a North Korean ICBM hit the north side of Chicago, people on the southside would not be killed by the blast. There is a world of difference between a 5-10 kt nuke and a 20mt nuke that the big boys play with. In order to have a nuclear war with the US, North Korea needs to develop fusion weapons in the megaton range, improve their guidance systems to the point they can actually hit something (not even the Russians have perfected this like the US has, only the US can reliably hit actual targets as opposed to just launching enough firepower to destroy the whole area). And finally, the North Koreans would need several hundred nukes pointed at the US...... just like the Russians and Chinese can do already. Even if by some miracle, NK manages to achieve tech parity with the US, its economy cannot support the maintance of hundreds of Nukes. Look at a map of the US, at the hundreds of mid to large cites and the hundreds of military and industrial areas, and realise that North Korea might be able to partially destroy ONE of them. You are in no danger. Yep
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2017 18:32
|
|
|
Stairmaster posted:I don't think anyone would give a poo poo in that scenario. conversely, no one would notice or care if one hit the south side
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2017 18:34
|
|
|
mastershakeman posted:conversely, no one would notice or care if one hit the south side Trump administration declares victory in Chicago war on crime.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2017 19:19
|
|
|
A GIANT PARSNIP posted:Trump administration declares victory in Chicago war on crime. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 00:45
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/891440474132795392 https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/891442016294494209 https://twitter.com/WSJ/status/891495935330705409 I'm not worried. Things are fine. Everything's going to be ok.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 04:41
|
|
|
OhFunny posted:https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/891440474132795392 You know that they always have bombers fly over every time they perform a missile test, right? And do you think his tweets are going to land us into a war with China? They're probably used to his bullshit by now Willo567 fucked around with this message at 05:07 on Jul 30, 2017 |
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 05:00
|
|
|
Willo567 posted:You know that they always have bombers fly over every time they perform a missile test, right? I have no idea what Trump will do on a spur of moment without any thought.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 05:13
|
|
|
OhFunny posted:I have no idea what Trump will do on a spur of moment without any thought. So far, he hasn't really done anything out of the ordinary when it comes to North Korea. Sure, maybe he'll break from that and take some drastic action, but I feel that's pretty unlikely from a guy whose motto on military action is "let the generals decide, they're the experts".
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 05:18
|
|
|
I think Trump views himself as an isolationist and he won't start a war unless Ivanka convinces him after seeing abused North Korean children or something.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 05:19
|
|
|
Burt Buckle posted:I think Trump views himself as an isolationist and he won't start a war unless Ivanka convinces him after seeing abused North Korean children or something. He drop a few guided's into Syria
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 05:34
|
|
|
Trump can't start a war by declaring it through a tweet, I presume. Can someone more versed in American political procedure inform me at which stages his proposal can get shut down? Or, y'know, at which point someone puts a bullet in his head? I'd prefer the latter if it wasn't for Pence.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 07:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 21, 2024 16:17 |
|
|
WarpedNaba posted:Trump can't start a war by declaring it through a tweet, I presume. When he was making his tweets about transgender people in the military, the Pentagon was terrified he was doing exactly that. Unfortunately. The President has the power to unilaterally attack any nation on Earth.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2017 07:15
|
|
