Posted: 10/17/2006 6:08:22 AM EDT
| Might as well start the NK nuke watch.... Looks like they are preparing for another test. Those sanctions sure showed them. |
Ha ha ha Lil Kim you've got no fissile for you missile! |
www.breitbart.com/news/2006/10/17/D8KQDMT80.html Found on drudge. |
|
Info on "act of war" talk: www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,221478,00.html "...merciless blows..." Whatever Lil'Kim - bring it and all hell will break loose..... We'll submit another memo |
|
The funny thing is (as many have pointed out) we are still, technically if not practically, at war with them. The Korean war was halted by an Armistice, there was no peace treaty ever signed. I'm on the fence about China. On the one hand, like the song says, maybe it's time for "everyone to clean up their own backyard." On the other, if they do, welcome to the new Chinese Penninsula. It's not like they'd go in there with our interests at heart, other than the nuke problem, they have completely different goals. |
That's the talk of the town. |
Thing is, I am just not convinced that it was a fizzle. |
|
here is my summory of the NK situation China will not allow any military action to take place US talk big, make threats, will not sacrifice economical relationship with China in a conflict NK clueless, will do what they want untill they hurt sombody from another nation, UN head in the sand, passes resolutions, SK and Japan may like to fight or ramp up defense, but US will rain them in in the end, nothing to see here move along |
Just looking at that pic makes the hair on my neck stand up. |
You got it. 
|
But now it's nuclear |
Now hold on there...just wait till they get the SECOND letter from the UN...that'll show 'em! I still say Iran's laughing their butts off at us because they know we won't/can't do anything about it. HH |
Said it before - We went into Iraq with the belief that Saddam had WMDs - North Korea has them and we talk trash. We are the new bitches on the block. Iran is listening and learning - we aren't gonna do crap except send Rice to do more lip service. A kitten playing with yarn is more aggressive than her. At the UN, Bolton at least stated that NK walking out was the equivilent to Khrushchev pounding his shoe on the desk. But thats the extent of it for now. China? Hell, how many here think how easy it would be to 'pay off' a Chinese Border Guard - considering they're already being half assed about the inspections. And Rice says she fully expects China to comply with the UN resolution -  At this point, I don't know if shes really trying to convice everyone or just plain naive. Beginning to think its the latter.
|
It reminded me of a scene from Lord of the Rings with the Orc's preparing for battle. 
|
It just about had to be at the size of that explosion. The big test for higher yeild bombs is whether you can get appropriate containment of the fissile material by the blast vectors so that as much of the "nuke" reaction goes critical before the materials are scattered by the explosion. Now, here's the thing: It would be harder, technically, to purposefully do that small of an explosion. IN a plutonium weapon the blast lenses (think shape charges with force focusing designs) would have to be even more precise, the timing more perfect, etc. When India tested its first nuke, it was in the 10 to 15 KT range. In my opinion, anything less than a KT is very suspect in terms of whether it can be called a successful nuclear test. |
|
I am just really concerned that they are pulling a really good ruse, and, in conjunction with Iran, are/were secretly shooting for a small, portable, low yield nuke. While I admit it is unlikely, that fact that it is possible makes me wonder..... |
I hear you, but just remember: MAD (Mutually assured destruction) is still at work and as to both Iran and Korea, its not even mutual. A single Ohio class sub (we've got about a dozen nuclear capable) holds 24 Trident II missiles. A single Trident II missile has EIGHT M88 MIRV warheads, and each of those fuckers is just shy of half a MEGATON... (475Kt) One Trident II missle can deliver 3.8 megatons of hurt, one full sub worth delivers 24 times that like 92 megatons. By comparison Fat Man (Nagasaki bom) was 21 kilotons (less than 5 percent of a single Trident II MIRV -- and there are 8 per missle mind you), and Little Boy was about 15 kilotons. (just over 3% of the size of a single M88 MIRV). By comparison to all this, lets give NK the benefit of the doubt and say they got up to a KILOTON to go in their device. That would be only two-tenths of a percent the yeild of one-eight of the payload on a Trident II. A nuke of that size would be perfect terrorist foder and could wipe out a superbowl to be sure, even a good chunk of a city, such as capital hill in D.C. But the counterstrike would be so furious that nothing of North Korea (or IRAN) would be left. Its not likely that they're testing a "gun barrel" design like Little Boy, because there's just no way they'd waste the uranium (ours used less thatn 2% of the uranium in the reaction before the blast ended criticality). So N.K. is most likely building little plutonium fission bombs, and although its possible to make such weapons small with the right technology, I don't think they can do it. After all, even our own Davey Crocket warhead (from the 120mm recoiless tactical nuke rifle) is about the size of one of those office water cooler jugs. And I have to stress, the tech to get the explosive force to do anything more than scatter the fissile materials would be tough. Perhaps NK got ahold of one or two of the missing soviot suitcase nukes. That might explain this, as the soviots could indeed engineer such a thing. Ironically, this would explain why the Russians announced they thought the explosion was closer to 4 or 6 kilotons instead of one (i.e., they want to deflect analysts from realizing they let some suitcases out of the stable). But why "test" them, if they found them? |
|
First, you are correct about MAD. However, I just dont think that Iran cares, as they feel Allah will protect them, and Kim is just to crazy to care. Second, part of my questionable theory is something you just mentioned. Soviet "suitcase" nukes. My addmitedly hypothetical scenerio..... what if Iran got ahold of a old soviet "suitcase" or other small low yield nuke either off the black market or straight from Russia (we know Russia has been helping with their nuke program). Iran is close with NK. NK has some nuclear technical abilities. Iran goes to NK and says you have materials, we have the product. They then reverse engineer the device, and build something that is size wise along the lines of something that could fit in say a small moving van or similar sized truck. Iran then gives them out to Jihadi's and both NK operatives and Jihadi's actively attempt to smuggle one into the US, or, fits one on to a short range missle and uses a mobile launch platform like a oil freighter, etc., to get it close enough to the US to launch. Again, its not a logical thing to do, but I dont feel we can think in logical terms here because we arent dealing with logical sane people who dont want to die. What you said about Russia's statements regarding the power would also fit into my thoughts if the original nuke did come from them. NK would have to test this new build, to make sure it functioned, hence the recent test (and the presence of Iranian "observers" that were there). NK and Iran both know that they have no viable delivery system for a big nuke, so they go the small easily (relatively speaking) transported route instead. They give the impression that they are trying to make a big nuke and fail, keeping people from suspecting that they were really trying to make a small one. Whats more dangerous....NK and Iran with a big nuke that they cant deliver, or a bunch of small ones that, while they lack the punch of a big one, they can find a way to deliver? And again, before all the asshats start with all the ludicrous remarks, this is simply called speculation and discussion. Adults do that on occasion. So take all your tin foil hat BS and/or anti-tin foil hat BS somewhere else. |
Yup that's exactly what I said in fewer words when they popped off the first one! |
|
Um...yes. Thats why I said they could be transported in something like a small moving van or similar truck. Wouldnt need a truck to handle a suitcase. 
|
|
another detail on the suitcase design that is in our favor, is they use tritium as an enhancer -- it supplies a nice big shower of extra neutrons at the beginning to make a bigger bang. Nice thing is tritium is very hard to come by and has a very short shelf life, so these tiny devices basically de-mil themselves. Any old ones left over from the 70's might not even go off. |
Connan the Barbarian |
Agreed. The troubling part about reliance on MAD is its presumption of rational actors. Game theory gets kind of fucked up with one side actually desires the war to end all wars. But China gets the fallout and radiation if we Nuke N.K., and they are rational and do care. They also spy like motherfuckers, evidenced in the nuclear area by getting our own designs out and having the fastest transition from fission bombs to fusion bombs in the history of nuclear capable nations. China will have its fingers on the pulse of this situation, and I think you'll see some action on its part to protect its own interests if there's a terrorist connection going on.
Hmmm... the criticism I would offer as to that theory is two fold: First, if they did get ahold of Russian suitcase nukes, the only reverse engineering they'd have to do would be the firing mechanism electronics (which I seem to recall intelligence saying was the major issue with deploying the nukes as anything other than dirty bombs). You've got to understand: There are like 4 dozen trigger points in an implosion bomb, and they've got to be fired with perfect timing. Its not as easy as cutting the wires leading to the tamper and simply reattaching them. They'd have to know which triggers were hooked into high speed explosives and which were hooked into low speed, etc. They certainly wouldn't be reverse engineering the core of weapons that old. My goodness, peeling back the tamper on a weapon even of that size would be major bad mojo, it would seem to me. Second, a bomb that would fit in a backpack if properly designed would be in the 1kt range. A bomb that would fit in a truck or shipping container would be 15 to 30 Kt unless it was a fission-fusion-fission weapon, in which case it gets into megaton range. This still means that unless the Iranians/Koreans simply figured out how to detonate the existing Russian suitcase cores (which were probably 1 to 3 Kt), then their test last week had to have been a fizzle.
I think you're making my point. Right now, the difference between a big nuke and a small nuke is between a volkswagon beetle and a harley davidson. If you can smuggle in the one, you can most likely smuggle in the other. It all depends on your targeting and intentions. If you are Iran, I concede your point: They don't give a fuck how big the nuke is, as what they want is to be the first to detonate a nuke on US or Israeli soil thereby finally succeeding in kicking off the clash of civilizations that the entire radical muslim segment has been trying to get for so long. But if you're Korea, why do you want to help with that? Koreans are just as infidel as the rest of us. They have more traditional territorial and deterrence / threat issues, mainly with respect to Japan. And for Japan, a small 1 Kt weapon would be jackshit. It could kill a lot of folks, but then the entire world would come down on NK and anhillate it. No, NK only is involved if they're trying to build something that keeps K.J.I. feeling like a decisive threat, not just an ongoing annoyance. And as for the Iranians, the big question here is what kind of room will the other nuclear nations give us if we get hit and want to respond in kind. Pakistan / India cancel each other out, at least while we've got Musharaff in Pakistan. They're too busy doing MAD with each other to risk jumping in on either side. Israel may flatting Iran before we get a chance, witness Osiriak back in the 1980s. France will be France. England will have our backs, and Russia and China are left as the big question marks. And as soon as we have Russia and China involved we're all talking about MAD again because one Submarine each makes both of those guys have a really bad day, which they've also visit on us to ensure the whole "mutual" part. Truth to tell, even if Kim Jong Ill nukes something in the USA and loudly proclaims credit for it, we probably can't nuke him without the blessing of China and the USSR. Each of these guys then run the risk that we would be bold enough to try a first strike, but even with the six minute subs-off-the coast scenario, they'd have plenty of time to get their own birds in teh air so we wouldnt' do it and I think they know that. Thus, the gut-sucker on a terrorist nuke is and has always been that we'd probably have to "absorb" the hit, study the intelligence (including the radiation signatures which I am told can help us figure out where the bomb came from), and then hit any of the nation states involved with overwhelming conventional force on a regime change basis. That is because we have not extended MAD in such a way as to keep the rougue elements of terrorism in check through their own compatriots, nor am I sure we could in present climates.
LOL, agreed! Here's a fun one for speculation: Does it bother you, especially being down that way, that we never found the Mark 15 that they lost near Tybee Island? 2 to 3 MEGAton device and we never found it?! |
Your summary, as well as your spelling, is incorrect. Maybe you haven't been paying attention, but the only threats, as well as much bluster, have been coming from NK. As far as reigning (as opposed to raining) in Japan and SK, you have no idea what you are talking about. |
Good points. More to think about. Tybee.....  I dont like to even think about that. Far too many plausible possibilities that usually get me to thinking too much. There was a story about it in the paper here not too long ago. Basically saying they know the general area...but cant find it. Oh, but dont worry, its completely safe...
|
You need to learn more history, son (hey I'm 35, that's old enough to call people "son" isn't it?)
|
Or "rein", even...
|