Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
United States has targeted a portion of their nuclear triad at North Korea
Stitch wrote:The US strategic arsenal of ICBM and SLBMs are currently targeted at the Arctic Ocean, I believe. Same with the Russian ICBM and SLBM force, to my knowledge. I am not sure if this is by treaty or mutual agreement. The weapons can be very quickly re-targeted so it's a symbolic gesture. I am sure OPLAN 8010 (the general plan for a nuclear engagement) includes North Korean assets.
TWA772LR wrote:Stitch wrote:The US strategic arsenal of ICBM and SLBMs are currently targeted at the Arctic Ocean, I believe. Same with the Russian ICBM and SLBM force, to my knowledge. I am not sure if this is by treaty or mutual agreement. The weapons can be very quickly re-targeted so it's a symbolic gesture. I am sure OPLAN 8010 (the general plan for a nuclear engagement) includes North Korean assets.
Why the Arctic? Why not into outer space?
johns624 wrote:Many of the USN Burke-class destroyers, as well as several Japanese ships, all have BMD capabilities with the Aegis system.
Aesma wrote:ICBMs are ballistic because of a treaty signed by the US and Russia. Otherwise by now all warheads would be of the orbital type with the ability to be redirected in flight.
mpgunner wrote:I think a preemptive, night time, strike of several EMP cruise missiles (like Boeing's Champ") would possibly render NK useless for a while.
The US response could be: "What? Your communications systems are out? What happened? We have know idea what happened".
mpgunner wrote:I think a preemptive, night time, strike of several EMP cruise missiles (like Boeing's Champ") would possibly render NK useless for a while.
The US response could be: "What? Your communications systems are out? What happened? We have know idea what happened".
Flaps wrote:No pre-emptive strike. Not necessary and too subject to unpredictable reactions elsewhere. Should North Korea actually attack though I would prefer to see a counter attack so overwhelming (read apocalyptic) that no one would ever dare think to try such a thing again. (hint Iran).
WIederling wrote:Flaps wrote:No pre-emptive strike. Not necessary and too subject to unpredictable reactions elsewhere. Should North Korea actually attack though I would prefer to see a counter attack so overwhelming (read apocalyptic) that no one would ever dare think to try such a thing again. (hint Iran).
Pronounced lack of situational understanding.
Ignore the big words from any politician. They invariable are talking to their own constituency.
( This seems to haunt Trump more than anyone else at the moment?)
There are only two nations around that I would deem irresponsible and derided enough
to do a nuclear first strike. ( cue LeMay and doctrine of a successfull and survivable first strike.)
The USA and ( only maybe ) Israel.
For every one else on this globe nukes are "fire insurance".
On the other hand LeMay acolytes seem to have made a comeback on home turf.
JetBuddy wrote:If there's a single nation on earth that needs nuclear weapons as a deterrence, it's Israel. If Iran develops nuclear capabilities, they would use them against Israel. So we can't let this happen. If the US doesn't stop Iran from developing a nuke, Israel will.
JetBuddy wrote:If there's a single nation on earth that needs nuclear weapons as a deterrence, it's Israel. If Iran develops nuclear capabilities, they would use them against Israel. So we can't let this happen. If the US doesn't stop Iran from developing a nuke, Israel will.
JetBuddy wrote:Clinton did not hand the North Koreans 5 billion dollars and two centrifuges; what he did do was get the NKs to suspend their nuke bomb program. He even got them to allow regular inspections of their nuke facilities and place cameras on their shuttered plutonium production facility.In 1995 (I think), Bill Clinton handed the North Koreans 5 billion dollars and two centrifuges.
JetBuddy wrote:In 2002 our dimwitted president Bush broke off the ongoing negotiations with NK, and publicly insulted them (a preview of Trump world); so in turn they kicked out the inspectors, broke the locks, turned off the cameras and resumed nuke development. Four years later they succeeded in detonating a device.In 2006 they detonated their first nuclear weapon.
JetBuddy wrote:Nonsense.In 2013 they miniturized their warheads to they could fit on an ICBM
JetBuddy wrote:In 2016 Obama got the Iranians to agree to a suspension of their nuke program in return for suspension of economic sanctions and the return of Iranian money that had been impounded. That agreement still holds today.In 2016 Barrack Obama handed the Iranians 1.5 billion dollars in cash.
JetBuddy wrote:LOLAnd I consider the Iranians even more irresponsible than the North Koreans.
dtw2hyd wrote:Just a dumb question. Until two weeks back intelligence community was saying DPRK was years away from miniaturizing a nuke. WTF happened?
salttee wrote:dtw2hyd wrote:Just a dumb question. Until two weeks back intelligence community was saying DPRK was years away from miniaturizing a nuke. WTF happened?
My guess is that there was a politically directed change of that assessment, as opposed to a technical re-assessment.
Pompeo is under Trump's control apparently.
A similar thing happened in 2003 when the CIA was adamant that there were no WMDs in Iraq, until enough arm twisting was done to get them to change their minds. Cheney visited CIA Hq in that lobbying effort - the first time the executive branch had ever gone to Langley.
salttee wrote:In 2016 Obama got the Iranians to agree to a suspension of their nuke program in return for suspension of economic sanctions and the return of Iranian money that had been impounded. That agreement still holds today.
moo wrote:Aesma wrote:ICBMs are ballistic because of a treaty signed by the US and Russia. Otherwise by now all warheads would be of the orbital type with the ability to be redirected in flight.
ICBMs are ballistic because thats the quickest delivery option - even with a weapon in the perfect orbit at the right time, it would take more time to deorbit that weapon onto a target than it would take for an ICBM to hit its target.
Add to that the fact that every orbital weapon would be tracked to within an inch of its life, and targeted with anti-satellite weapons at the start of any conflict... ICBMs are just easier and "safer"...
salttee wrote:JetBuddy wrote:In 2002 our dimwitted president Bush broke off the ongoing negotiations with NK, and publicly insulted them (a preview of Trump world); so in turn they kicked out the inspectors, broke the locks, turned off the cameras and resumed nuke development. Four years later they succeeded in detonating a device.In 2006 they detonated their first nuclear weapon.
salttee wrote:JetBuddy wrote:Nonsense.In 2013 they miniturized their warheads to they could fit on an ICBM
salttee wrote:JetBuddy wrote:In 2016 Obama got the Iranians to agree to a suspension of their nuke program in return for suspension of economic sanctions and the return of Iranian money that had been impounded. That agreement still holds today.In 2016 Barrack Obama handed the Iranians 1.5 billion dollars in cash.
DfwRevolution wrote:Are you under the impression that Bush knew what he was doing and had thought out the consequences of his "axis of evil" accusation? If so, you are in a minority.North Korea's nuclear weapons program didn't begin in 2002. That's why the Bush administration took the position it did. There's a plainly obvious lesson from 2002: if your counterpart's objective in a negotiation is simply to buy time, then you must have a point in time where you will cease negotiations. Negotiations are a means, not an end.
salttee wrote:JetBuddy wrote:Nonsense.In 2013 they miniturized their warheads to they could fit on an ICBM
DfwRevolution wrote:Nonsense based on what? Plenty of countries have achieved advanced miniaturized designs with minimal testing.
JetBuddy wrote:In 2016 Obama got the Iranians to agree to a suspension of their nuke program in return for suspension of economic sanctions and the return of Iranian money that had been impounded. That agreement still holds today.In 2016 Barrack Obama handed the Iranians 1.5 billion dollars in cash.
DfwRevolution wrote:Iran has ended its active nuclear weapon development program, most people see that as a good thing. The money that was returned was their money, are you advocating that we steal their money? You need to give that some thought.The agreement "holds" because the agreement offered by Obama and Kerry were so conciliatory that Iran could effectively continue it's WMD programs at an R&D level and get a windfall of hard cash and economic benefits. Again, that's the danger of placing negotiations and an agreement as the end rather than the means.
JetBuddy wrote:WIederling wrote:Flaps wrote:No pre-emptive strike. Not necessary and too subject to unpredictable reactions elsewhere. Should North Korea actually attack though I would prefer to see a counter attack so overwhelming (read apocalyptic) that no one would ever dare think to try such a thing again. (hint Iran).
Pronounced lack of situational understanding.
Ignore the big words from any politician. They invariable are talking to their own constituency.
( This seems to haunt Trump more than anyone else at the moment?)
There are only two nations around that I would deem irresponsible and derided enough
to do a nuclear first strike. ( cue LeMay and doctrine of a successfull and survivable first strike.)
The USA and ( only maybe ) Israel.
For every one else on this globe nukes are "fire insurance".
On the other hand LeMay acolytes seem to have made a comeback on home turf.
If there's a single nation on earth that needs nuclear weapons as a deterrence, it's Israel. If Iran develops nuclear capabilities, they would use them against Israel. So we can't let this happen. If the US doesn't stop Iran from developing a nuke, Israel will.
In 1995 (I think), Bill Clinton handed the North Koreans 5 billion dollars and two centrifuges. In 2006 they detonated their first nuclear weapon. In 2013 they miniturized their warheads to they could fit on an ICBM, and in 2017 they have ICBMs capable of reaching North America.
In 2016 Barrack Obama handed the Iranians 1.5 billion dollars in cash. The Iranians are present in North Korea at every weapons tests, and they're sharing technology between each other. I would bet Iran has a functioning nuclear weapon in 5 years or less unless something is done to stop them. And I consider the Iranians even more irresponsible than the North Koreans.
JetBuddy wrote:If there's a single nation on earth that needs nuclear weapons as a deterrence, it's Israel.
If Iran develops nuclear capabilities, they would use them against Israel. So we can't let this happen. If the US doesn't stop Iran from developing a nuke, Israel will.
In 2016 Barrack Obama handed the Iranians 1.5 billion dollars in cash.
I would bet Iran has a functioning nuclear weapon in 5 years or less unless something is done to stop them.
And I consider the Iranians even more irresponsible than the North Koreans.
JetBuddy wrote:And I consider the Iranians even more irresponsible than the North Koreans.
Mortyman wrote:JetBuddy wrote:And I consider the Iranians even more irresponsible than the North Koreans.
How did you get to that conclusion ?
Mortyman wrote:JetBuddy wrote:And I consider the Iranians even more irresponsible than the North Koreans.
How did you get to that conclusion ? Total nonsence
JetBuddy wrote:And Israel's priority is to continuously expand into other peoples land.Mortyman wrote:JetBuddy wrote:And I consider the Iranians even more irresponsible than the North Koreans.
How did you get to that conclusion ? Total nonsence
Because their priority is to wipe Israel off the map. And they keep repeating their intentions to do so.
JetBuddy wrote:Mortyman wrote:JetBuddy wrote:And I consider the Iranians even more irresponsible than the North Koreans.
How did you get to that conclusion ? Total nonsence
Because their priority is to wipe Israel off the map. And they keep repeating their intentions to do so.
salttee wrote:And Israel's priority is to continuously expand into other peoples land.
Israel created the problem and Israel continues to feed the problem. So touche' to that.
Are you Israeli or American?
Channex757 wrote:And cover themselves in nuclear fallout?
You should study how prevailing winds work in the Northern hemisphere.
Iranian grumbling and threats against Israel are just windbaggery and should be treated as such. They have no way of carrying them out, and would bring destruction and contamination on themselves without even considering retaliation.
JetBuddy wrote:I'm quite certain Iran would be less worried about nuclear fallout than wiping Israel off the map. The only reason they haven't done it yet is because they don't have the capacity.
JetBuddy wrote:No, I'm not. Now we're going into politics, there's no point in discussing it.
JetBuddy wrote:salttee wrote:And Israel's priority is to continuously expand into other peoples land.
Israel created the problem and Israel continues to feed the problem. So touche' to that.
Are you Israeli or American?
No, I'm not. Now we're going into politics, there's no point in discussing it.
salttee wrote:DfwRevolution wrote:North Korea's nuclear weapons program didn't begin in 2002. That's why the Bush administration took the position it did. There's a plainly obvious lesson from 2002: if your counterpart's objective in a negotiation is simply to buy time, then you must have a point in time where you will cease negotiations. Negotiations are a means, not an end.
Are you under the impression that Bush knew what he was doing and had thought out the consequences of his "axis of evil" accusation? If so, you are in a minority.
salttee wrote:salttee wrote:JetBuddy wrote:Nonsense.In 2013 they miniturized their warheads to they could fit on an ICBMDfwRevolution wrote:Nonsense based on what? Plenty of countries have achieved advanced miniaturized designs with minimal testing.
Nonsense based on a complete lack of evidence to prove the assertion. If you want to make that assertion then you need to provide some citations to prove it. The burden of proof is on you and "Plenty of countries have achieved advanced miniaturized designs" is just nonsense piled on top of nonsense.
salttee wrote:DfwRevolution wrote:The agreement "holds" because the agreement offered by Obama and Kerry were so conciliatory that Iran could effectively continue it's WMD programs at an R&D level and get a windfall of hard cash and economic benefits. Again, that's the danger of placing negotiations and an agreement as the end rather than the means.
Iran has ended its active nuclear weapon development program, most people see that as a good thing.
salttee wrote:The money that was returned was their money, are you advocating that we steal their money?
salttee wrote:What you also need to give some thought to is the fact that Iran exists, and it has done so as a major power in its region for the last 2,500 years. Iran is not going away even if you don't like them. Take a look at what happened when the US tried to re-arrange Iraq.
I recognize your attitude, I've heard it before. Your kind has done a pretty good job of crippling this country with your losing wars in Vietnam then again in Iraq. The state this country is in now is a direct result of those two lost wars. If you people have your way and get the US into a war with Iran that will be the end of the United States as it has existed for the last 200 years. And that might be enough to bring me to take up arms in defense of my country. But I wouldn't have Iran in my sights.
DfwRevolution wrote:They forfeited that money when their criminal regime took 52 of our citizens hostage for 444 days.
DfwRevolution wrote:They forfeited that money when their criminal regime took 52 of our citizens hostage for 444 days.
glideslope wrote:I often wonder why we all can't just get along.
flyingturtle wrote:glideslope wrote:I often wonder why we all can't just get along.
Returning to the topic: The five classical nuclear powers needed a lot of nuclear tests to make their bombs predictable and reliable. Where did North Korea buy that knowledge? (The U.S. Trinity test was the only one before dropping the bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but well - these were huge things.)
David
flyingturtle wrote:(The U.S. Trinity test was the only one before dropping the bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but well - these were huge things.)
DfwRevolution wrote:
They forfeited that money when their criminal regime took 52 of our citizens hostage for 444 days. Further, they have no entitlement to trade with our businesses and buy our products. That's a privilege reserved for countries who don't vow to facilitate our destruction.
tommy1808 wrote:flyingturtle wrote:(The U.S. Trinity test was the only one before dropping the bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but well - these were huge things.)
The Nagasaki bomb was used operationally without being tested, Trinity validated the Nagasaki bomb design.
Best regards
Thomas
NLCFFX wrote:tommy1808 wrote:flyingturtle wrote:(The U.S. Trinity test was the only one before dropping the bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but well - these were huge things.)
The Nagasaki bomb was used operationally without being tested, Trinity validated the Nagasaki bomb design.
Best regards
Thomas
The Hiroshima bomb was used without testing (Uranium gun type).
Tugger wrote:Kim knows China would love to be rid of him but the nukes are his ace in the whole against China.
Tugger wrote:The USA would prefer a peaceful democratic society which China would never allow.