• 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.

So North Korea admits they want to nuke the US... Update with Video

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
They SO want other people to be afraid of them, but they have no clue. It truly baffles N. Korea that they can instill fear into their population to ensure submission, but it doesn't work for the rest of the world.

N. Korea could have a nuke, but it takes all of their resources to get even one made Their missile technology is pretty much laughable...they have range but have no control on guidance. On top of that, they're building this thing at a time when anti-missile tech is really starting to mature.

There really needs to be a public uprising in that country. I'm sure the people hate living like that, and it doesn't really benefit anyone but a few people in power.
 
Why do we even entertain these threads? I used to be VERY interested in NK affair, but nowadays I don't even care anymore.

It's same empty chest beating. Everyone knows NK got nothing other than conventional weapons pointed SK. That's the ONLY shtick they have going.
 
SandEagle said:
we're not going to do anything about it. NK has no oil. it was only included in the 'axis of evil' group ( booga booga ) so that it didnt look like we were just killing arabs
Click to expand...

People keep saying crap like this, but North America is nearly self-sufficient on oil. It's not a big factor. We're more concerned about people that make infrastructures to sneak into countries and blow things up.
 
Why isn't this in P&N?


If you take our precedent of going after people with fictitious WMD, it'd only reason to assume we'd have to go after people who actually threaten us.
 
Fritzo said:
People keep saying crap like this, but North America is nearly self-sufficient on oil. It's not a big factor. We're more concerned about people that make infrastructures to sneak into countries and blow things up.
Click to expand...

There's still not an infinite amount. And yes, the US could be selfsufficient for quite a while, but when the oil starts running low locally you'd have to import from abroad at hugely inflated prices. If you secure foreign oil and use that the first while too the US oil will last a bit longer, and may not run out before others do. Which means US oil will then be so much more valuable.

They couldn't care less who is 'afraid' abroad btw. They just don't want to lose power, so they have to use a combination of awe and fear for the N-Korean population while making sure no other countries are likely to attack them. And nukes are a sure way to accomplish the second point, which means they can focus on the first part.
Since trade restrictions make it harder to keep the population just happy or scared enough not to revolt they want to have something to barter with too, and they can use nukes for that as well. Say you'll stop developing more or limit the number of nukes and you might get less strict trade regulations again.
 
in b4 this gets wrapped up and delivered to the foaming at the mouth types at P&N.


they cant hurt the US but they can certainly hold s.korea and japan as hostages.

the second they to attempt any real strike they would be done. satellites are monitoring them 24/7, hopefully one of our missile defense systems would knock it down during ascent(assuming they are sensible enough to have proper mirv warheads that only arm on descent phase, but with their slapdash standards and diligence who knows).

after that we would probably give an ulitmatum like unconditional surrender before we droped a fuel-air(thermobaric bomb)MOAB. clean non radioactive destruction, large enough effect to level their entire infrastructure, and small enough to use on a city without affecting china or s.korea.[im sure the neo-cons are drooling for a scenario like this]
 
Why is everyone talking like they going to shoot a nuclear rocket into the US? They be better off sneaking it through Canada and detonating it in Seattle or some other city. The US can't even keep out Mexicans from entering the boarder. Even Cubans can float on a make shit raft into Florida. What makes anyone think terrorists can't do the same thing with a nuke?
 
Jeffg010 said:
Why is everyone talking like they going to shoot a nuclear rocket into the US? They be better off sneaking it through Canada and detonating it in Seattle or some other city. The US can't even keep out Mexicans from entering the boarder. Even Cubans can float on a make shit raft into Florida. What makes anyone think terrorists can't do the same thing with a nuke?
Click to expand...

This has never been done because the odds of the attacked nation finding out where it came from are pretty high and the possibility that it could touch off a global exchange (everyone looses).
 
K1052 said:
This has never been done because the odds of the attacked nation finding out where it came from are pretty high and the possibility that it could touch off a global exchange (everyone looses).
Click to expand...

I'm sure a country like NK cares about something like that. I think it will be a matter of time before someone tries it.
 
China seriously needs to sit NK down and have the "Look, we all hate America. But you can't nuke shit if you tried, even if you could, they owe us a lot of money and we rely on them for much of our business" talk.
 
If they want to start wagging their Nuclear Pecker our's is much bigger and they will loose.

SAC_05_zps2435731c.jpg
 
To be fair if I lived anywhere except North America I'd want to nuke the U.S. too. Hell, I live here and sometimes it's hard to understand why we shouldn't self-nuke.
 
K1052 said:
Yawn. If they don't want an up close and very personal demonstration of actual working thermonuclear weapons they'll keep to themselves. Otherwise it's the same old same old with them...threaten to try and get shit for free.
Click to expand...

Pretty much.

If you do some research, you'll see that this is the pattern they've been following for the last 20 year or so. Every time there's new sanctions against them, they rattle sabers, trying to get attention (and some money).

http://www.theonion.com/articles/n-korea-detonates-40-years-of-gdp,2068/

Unfortunately, this will go on until the Korean War will finally be over. For those who don't know, it never ended - it's just smoldering under a ceasefire.

If I were to put on my predictions hat, here's what I'd say:

China is already fed up with NK. They know they need the West as a market for their goods, and pretty soon they won't want to risk losing this market over a fickle, unreliable (and altogether weak and indefensible) ally. Especially since they're beginning to flex their muscles at Japan, as well.

When China finally drops NK like a hot potato (in exchange for economic benefits), there's room for a UN resolution allowing the use of military force to restore stability in the peninsula (and, considering Pyongyang rhetoric, that's just unavoidable). Moreover, the U.S. is very unlikely to allow NK to get missile technology that would allow them to reach the continental United States (or even Hawaii).

A series of surgical strikes would take out Kim-and-ilk. Yes, they can (and probably will) toss some bombs over the border at South Korea (and possibly Japan). Some of these bombs might be worse than conventional explosives. But China will probably be happy to get rid of Samsung and LG, anyway.

The end is near for NK. Five more years, or so.
 
Soccerman06 said:
So what is the official rule the gov has if we get nuked by a peanut country like NK? Do we plant a bunch of carriers outside their country and wait them out or rush in like middle east or do we just eradicate them off the face of the planet? Id like to think we are more civil that carpet bombing them but the hell Ill expecting another iraq if we get nuked.
Click to expand...

I think if we were nuked, we should refunded them, with interested. 10 for every 1 used.

No one would miss North Korea. Sure the world would be upset with us, but hey sometimes the good guy must look like the bad guy (Batman)
 
Sophitia said:
China seriously needs to sit NK down and have the "Look, we all hate America. But you can't nuke shit if you tried, even if you could, they owe us a lot of money and we rely on them for much of our business" talk.
Click to expand...

And they would have more than half the world on their ass for using a nuke.

The next country to use a nuke, will probably find 20+ countries on their doorstep.
 
diesbudt said:
The next country to use a nuke, will probably find 20+ countries on their doorstep.
Click to expand...

...and their eyes would be glowing red!

In all honesty, it's preferable to have KN toiling away at nuclear weaponry, rather than chemical or bacteriological crap (which is strange, considering that this type of research would be cheaper for them, and easier to hide)...
 
Bah.

This is all about money, as it always has been. NK wants less sanctions, and this is the way they do it.

Most of the time, it works. Unfortunately.
 
Fritzo said:
They SO want other people to be afraid of them, but they have no clue. It truly baffles N. Korea that they can instill fear into their population to ensure submission, but it doesn't work for the rest of the world.

N. Korea could have a nuke, but it takes all of their resources to get even one made Their missile technology is pretty much laughable... they have range but have no control on guidance. On top of that, they're building this thing at a time when anti-missile tech is really starting to mature.

There really needs to be a public uprising in that country. I'm sure the people hate living like that, and it doesn't really benefit anyone but a few people in power.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't say it's laughable. Sure, we have the interceptors to take it out but our GMD has never proven it can take out an ICBM. From the other thread.:
Under exo-atmospheric conditions, the warhead and deployed decoys would appear to have the same weight making it difficult for radar systems to distinguish between them and know what object to target. Adversaries could also use an explosion to cut the missile casing into multiple pieces to make it more difficult to identify the warhead. North Korea and Iran have already demonstrated an ability to do this in previous launches that involved two stages (armscontrol).

Despite testing concerns, the Bush administration quickly pushed the GBI program through to ensure the US can defend against possible ICBM capabilities of North Korea or Iran. However, the Obama administration stopped the program from expanding in the near term to redirect GMD funding to flight testing and improve interceptor accuracy. As a result, this could stagnate the growth of the GBI program to a point where US enemy missile capabilities surpass the effectiveness of the GBI program.

According to Dean Wilkening’s model for calculating BMD effectiveness, the US would require three interceptors per warhead for a total of six interceptors to defend against two ICBMs from North Korea or Iran. Even though US interceptors have not been tested sufficiently on missiles using countermeasures, ICBM’s from novice states may not have these countermeasures. If these weapons did have countermeasures, 30 interceptors should be more than enough to destroy warheads that would only require 6 interceptors in a shoot look shoot attack.
Click to expand...

Basically, we should be able to take out the warheads, even if they had countermeasures but there's no guarantee since we haven't had a successful GBI test to date. Remember that shit never goes as planned, even after successful rigorous testing, e.g. losing a billion dollar helo piloted by Navy Seals to get/kill OBL proved this point.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top