-
We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.
N. Korea threatens U.S. with 'nuclear war'
- Thread starter Darkstar757
- Start date
NK has never been too bright. They may be able to blow something up, but I don't think they have the fire power do much damage to the U.S. I'd guess all they could really do is enabling our own little wannabe dictator by giving him an excuse to blow up something in another part of the world. 🙁
Two observations. First, this is an example of our willingness to believe almost anything about "the other." We're too smart to engage in nuclear war but "the other" is crazy and just might do it.
Second, get yourself one of those atlases of the U.S. that come in about a 15" x 11" format. Open up to the spread page showing the U.S. Get a sharp pencil and touch the page. The size of that dot is approximately the size of blast damage. Whatever N. Korea can muster would be unpleasant in the extreme but would not be fatal to the U.S. I don't know what our official warhead count is now but it's probably about 10,000 warheads. I wouldn't stay awake nights worrying about North Korea.
Second, get yourself one of those atlases of the U.S. that come in about a 15" x 11" format. Open up to the spread page showing the U.S. Get a sharp pencil and touch the page. The size of that dot is approximately the size of blast damage. Whatever N. Korea can muster would be unpleasant in the extreme but would not be fatal to the U.S. I don't know what our official warhead count is now but it's probably about 10,000 warheads. I wouldn't stay awake nights worrying about North Korea.
BaliBabyDoc
Lifer
Well it is bluster but I think you are conflating issues. The DPRK is as likely to attack the PRC as they are South Korea . . . which is to say it ain't gonna happen. Further, it's highly unlikely they have a missile that can reach the US . . . it's even more unlikely they have the capability of putting a nuclear warhead on top of a ICBM capable of reaching the US . . . Faux News propaganda notwithstanding.
Now Japan . . . might have reason to worry . . . but not much. The DPRK needs stuff . . . food, fuel, human rights . . . and they get a lot of stuff from Japan . . . albeit not as much as China and South Korea.
Further, a strategic nuclear attack against the DPRK would spread radioactivity across East Asia and possibly Southeast Asia as well . . . ie the DPRK drops a bomb that kills a couple of hundred thousand (at most) and the US responds with a weapon that kills many times that number and pollutes the air, land, and water for a billion.
Brinksmanship works extremely well when you have nothing to lose and your opponent has everything to lose.
Also take note, the DPRK is threatening a nuclear RESPONSE to a pre-emptive attack by the US.
The part of the article I like the best is the speculation that their new missile "might" reach the US with a "light payload"...
Translated from Bush faction fear speak into plain English, it might be able to deliver a grapefruit to the aleutians, if they got lucky...
The DPRK govt is the near perfect foil for current Admin agitprop, being about as predictable as sunrise.
Translated from Bush faction fear speak into plain English, it might be able to deliver a grapefruit to the aleutians, if they got lucky...
The DPRK govt is the near perfect foil for current Admin agitprop, being about as predictable as sunrise.
Nuclear munitions are not particularly radioactive when the fuel is spread over a wide area. The radiation danger after a nuclear blast comes from transiently radioactive soil and dust particles, that had neutrons ejected from their nuclei by gamma radiation and high-energy neutrons of the blast. This is what causes the fallout radiation, but what's important to realize is that the half-life of fallout is very short, and is no longer relevant after a few weeks.
K1052
Elite Member
Radioactive fallout depends on the weapon used, how it is used (ground or airburst), and the prevailing winds/geography. US nuclear weapons are actually pretty "clean" in terms of radioisotope production.
NK (or more specifically its leadership) has a lot to lose, namely their lives and positions of power above the suffering masses they repress to maintain their lavish lifestyle. An actual conflict gains them little. This is all moot anyway since it is just more bluster to stir things up and deflect attention away from Iran onto them to gear up for another round of extortion.
PrinceofWands
Lifer
Having seen how America has behaved in the the past, and especially the last few years, I don't blame them a bit. If America tried to pre-empt me I'd be all for retaliating as well. Of course, that doesn't cover situations that aren't pre-emption. In which case it would hardly be justified.
Moral of the story: USA needs to learn to stay the fvck out of everyone elses business. Our rights cease at our borders.
Moral of the story: USA needs to learn to stay the fvck out of everyone elses business. Our rights cease at our borders.
PrinceofWands
Lifer
We did not use pre-emption in WWI or WWII, or most etc's. WWI was not caused by America sending operatives into a foreign nation to destabalize it in order to make some rich Americans richer, or protect us from the ludicrous threat of 'godless communism'. What I'm trying to tell you is that your analogies are flawed. Instead, let's look at some places where America has gotten involved: current Iraq, Vietnam, Guatamala, Chile, Venezuela, Iran, etc. Those are verifiable etc's by the way, where US involvement cause serious issues and has set the stage for many of the global conflicts of today.
There is NO SUCH THING as interests. It's a euphamism for rich peoples money and has NOTHING to do with 99% of the population, or the nation. Responsibilities...ok, that one I'll buy. But our responsibility is to be a role model, to train, to offer humanitarian aid, etc. It is NOT to be world police, or the neighborhood bully.
PrinceofWands
Lifer
I don't know what he meant, but I can see it both ways.
You can say that N. Korea's statements and actions were the beginning, but you could just as easily argue that America's history of interference in foreign affairs made NK paranoid enough to develop a nuke program in the first place. Can you prove it either way? Nope. It's just opinion.
In other words, it may not be that he's blaming America for starting everything, but pointing out that US actions have not helped the situation, and may have contributed.
Unles you are meaning 'we' like us personally, in which case you could be outraged at being held responsible when you have done your best to alter the course of US involvement (as I have). In which case we are in total agreement.
PrinceofWands
Lifer
Define and prove corruption.
Define and prove evil.
Define and explain empire.
I ask for these because you are making pre-suppositions that are largely subjective in nature. In order to be corrupt there must be a natural state to deviate from. I would concede that NK has altered from most established governmental forms, but the question of corruption begs further consideration. Evil is, of course, entirely subjective. Empire suggests ruling multiple countries. I don't believe NK does. Or it suggests a monarchy with an emporer as head of state...also not exactly correct. Lastly your wording suggests that all of NK is evil, when in reality you likely meant the the ruler of NK is evil (or at the very least mentally unstable).
Perhaps a more reasonable statment would have been, "what blame, if any, do you place on North Korea, or more specifically the head of state of North Korea whom many view as a terrible ruler with possible mental illness?"
The NK is jusr boasting, same as Iraq did. I be there's alteast couple dozen satellites observing every corner of that country and they know exactly where and what is. I am pretty sure they don't have a huge arsenal and if they launch chances are the missles will be shot down before they reach their traget, in the mean time surgical strikes will cripple entire miliatary and infrustructure in the matter of hours. I mean they do have huge army, so does Iran but we all know that numbers don;t mean much these days.
Unfortunately, the problem with your analogy is that nuclear fire would most likely be limited to high population areas. If you're a redneck (and most likely bush supporter) living in the middle of nowehere, you probably shouldnt worry. If you live in an urban environment, your chances skyrocket.
they have I believe it was at most 10 small nuclear devices, and right now the only means they have to deliver them is by sneaking them into the country. This woudl be somewhat difficult since we don't trade with North Korea, so they would ahve to offload at some other port. Or possbily just put it on a ship and try to get to our coast undetected (this takes weeks). Commercial airlines are probably best, but the bomb would show up when it landed in the US, so they would have to detonate it at the airport which are usually away from the most densly populated areas. Certainly they could kill perhaps a few hundred thousand, obviously thats increadbly devestating to the country, but not armeggedon by any means. OF coruse, if they did this then they would loose all their power, and almsot certianly their lives. There are many people in Afghanistan and other countries who love the terrorsits and will hide them. There aint nobody that loves the North Korean leaders, their own countrymen would probably kill them if the US or China didn't get them with the initial strike. But anyways, this is all just big talk, nothing will come of it. Kim Jong Il is just trying to get attention and hopefully concessions for his crap hole country.
greatfool66
Member
greatfool66
Member
No such thing as interests?
You're right it has a lot to do with rich people's money.
Those rich people are probably all the citizens of the US who use oil in some way for energy. Its all about interests.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 24K
-
-
