N. Korea wants to Nuke the U.S.

[Jimmy_Leppard]

There won't be any nuking, what the hell is wrong with you? lol

[sivispacem]

 

Simple, because detonating a nuke far above America is much easier than actually trying to hit a city. I'm pretty sure that IF NK would ever launch a nuke, the purpose would be to create an EMP, as this would be something that they COULD actually accomplish, getting a nuke down to a city is a completely different story. We also need to remember that it doesn't only cause damage on the ground, a lot of satellites would also be fried instantly.

Yet again, you seem to completely ignore the fact that developing nuclear weapons that focus on enhancing the radiation output in particular spectrum is incredibly difficult and many, many years- probably decades- away from what the DPRK are capable of doing. Right now, they're at Manhattan project levels- they've got a gun-type fission design that doesn't result in a fizzle. As for "a lot of satellites being fried", I'm not so sure. Given that the area of direct "influence"- including the EMP effects- of a nuclear weapon is roughly spherical, I'd argue that due to the fact the diameter of the earth is so much greater at 400-1000km, and the relative sparseness of satellites in orbit in comparison to potentially viable targets on the ground, the effects are- theoretically speaking- much less severe. And that's quite aside from the fact that a) we're not certain exactly what proportion of the E1 blast will escape the atmosphere and magnetosphere and actually have an influence on satellites, and b) satellites are already hardened against the electromagnetic interference created by cosmic radiation anyway.

 

Which is quite aside from the fact that they don't need to hit a city. The basic physics of ICBM interception dictate that the most dangerous point for the warhead is the elevation; the safest the descent. Missiles are, quite simply, very easy to intercept when they are ascending- it's the separation of the warhead and the effective free-fall which makes an ICBM payload so dangerous. Why on earth would they give the US three hundred miles of breathing room to very quickly down a missile when it would be far more efficient to elevate it to, say, 60km and drop it somewhere within a 1,000 mile radius of Hawaii, for instance?

 

 

The problem with the EMP still is that we don't know how much damage it will do, as all the tests were in the 60s and we just didn't have all the electronics like today. There wasn't that much damage done by starfish prime, simply because the technology was a lot more forgiven to the electrical peaks generated by the EMP, the same test would probably power off all of Hawaii for months if done today.

I've tried to explain this several times, as have some of the sources you've provided. It's perfectly possible to test the resistance to electromagnetic forces in components. Embedded systems are the easiest to secure, as you can essentially box them up and prevent interference from any kind of radiation or induced current. That's the major difference between Starfish Prime and nowadays- the prevalence in embedded systems. Yes, theoretical the E1 pulse from a nuclear weapon is far more damaging to modern electronics than it is valve electronics. But electromagnetic shielding on major components is so commonplace that it's absurd. A domestic microwave is completely electromagnetically shielded to all wavelengths down to about 10-12cm. Military integrated systems- antennae aside- would be almost completely shielded from such a blast. Your comment about "powering off Hawaii for months" is completely incorrect, too. As both your and my sources indicated, the damage caused to electrical transmission infrastructure in Starfish Prime was caused by the inductive currents of the MHD-EMP (E3). The general infrastructure for the transportation of electrical has not changed for nearly 100 years now. We still use cables buried underground or suspended in the air. Both of these are still as susceptible to damage by MHD-EMP as back then. So therefore this claim would rest solely on the premise that MHD-EMPs were more powerful now- as all other influence factors in your provided example are exactly the same.

 

 

On the other hand, North Korea apparently is making progress with their nuclear program.

The DPRK have had three nuclear tests- one fizzle, one very small yield (3-8KT) and one roughly-Hiroshima-yield test. They're about as advanced on their nuclear programme as the US was in July 1945. To put that into perspective, the US has had more success shooting down satellites using air-launched, modified anti-aircraft missiles with no actual warhead than the DPRK has had in detonating working nuclear weapons.

 

I really feel like you've become obsessed by the threat of some kind of mythical, apocalyptic EMP disaster.

Edited April 1, 2013 by sivispacem

[KFranchise]

Didn't we destroy North Korea in the Korean War? If they do try and nuke us, we'll just nuke them to hell. But until then....

[nightwalker83]

I don't see the rocket ever getting off the ground if all they can count to is Un.

Edited April 1, 2013 by nightwalker83

[Trund]

 

As for "a lot of satellites being fried", I'm not so sure. Given that the area of direct "influence"- including the EMP effects- of a nuclear weapon is roughly spherical, I'd argue that due to the fact the diameter of the earth is so much greater at 400-1000km, and the relative sparseness of satellites in orbit in comparison to potentially viable targets on the ground, the effects are- theoretically speaking- much less severe. And that's quite aside from the fact that a) we're not certain exactly what proportion of the E1 blast will escape the atmosphere and magnetosphere and actually have an influence on satellites, and b) satellites are already hardened against the electromagnetic interference created by cosmic radiation anyway.

The problem here is the resulting radiation from the explosion, which is not going to vanish that quickly, it will result in a radiation belt around the earth, satellites flying through it could be severely damaged. It's true that satellites are protected against these things, but not enough to be able to withstand heavy radiation. Even sun flares now and then cause malfunctions, and a nuclear explosion in space would most likely cause a much higher radiation level, unless the satellites are shut down they could still be damaged significally. Like I said many times though, I'm not claiming this is the case, simply saying that it's a possibility, so you should calm down a little because your replies mostly make it sound like I'm predicting how it will be.

 

 

 

I've tried to explain this several times, as have some of the sources you've provided. It's perfectly possible to test the resistance to electromagnetic forces in components. Embedded systems are the easiest to secure, as you can essentially box them up and prevent interference from any kind of radiation or induced current.

This is true, it is POSSIBLE, but it's not mostly not done, because it's inefficient and costs too much. I've read several articles that this technology is actually available, and is being tested here and there, but these are just 1-2 years old, there hasn't been much progress on protecting commercial sectors about this kind of threat, and it's impossible to protect the complete power grid as well.

 

The damage done by starfish prime can not be compared to today as well. Systems work completely different nowadays, and there's no way to know whether these systems would survive an EMP attack or not, it's purely speculative. So we have to go for the worst case scenario, and that is the complete failure of power in case of an EMP.

 

 

The general infrastructure for the transportation of electrical has not changed for nearly 100 years now. We still use cables buried underground or suspended in the air. Both of these are still as susceptible to damage by MHD-EMP as back then. So therefore this claim would rest solely on the premise that MHD-EMPs were more powerful now- as all other influence factors in your provided example are exactly the same.

Main infrastructure yes, but not the stations that connect these systems. They all switched to modern computers, if they fail the whole system fails. Transformers are still prone to get completely damaged by an EMP. It has happened in Canada before from a solar flare in 1989. Again, the failure of these systems are worst case scenario, as this would also take the longest to be repaired.

 

 

The DPRK have had three nuclear tests- one fizzle, one very small yield (3-8KT) and one roughly-Hiroshima-yield test. They're about as advanced on their nuclear programme as the US was in July 1945. To put that into perspective, the US has had more success shooting down satellites using air-launched, modified anti-aircraft missiles with no actual warhead than the DPRK has had in detonating working nuclear weapons.

I've said it many times before though that I didn't claim that it will happen now, I'm just saying that it COULD happen in long term. The problem here is that NK might be getting information from Iran, and they are far more advanced. Surely the things we talk about will most likely never happen, but it's always nice to talk about the possibilties, and that's what we are doing, or not?

 

 

I really feel like you've become obsessed by the threat of some kind of mythical, apocalyptic EMP disaster.

 

Well, that's what the thread is about though, "N. Korea wants to Nuke the U.S.". We're just having an argument about it, I guess that's fair enough.

 

 

[ryuclan]

Read a report today stating that america is starting to export more oil and natural gas than Iran. And to top that off China is now number one importer of oil and NG. I Dont think they're going to get NK's back if they do something stupid. Game over Kim.

[darthYENIK]

Every time I see a news report about North Korea, it's comedy. Stuff like Kim Jong Un saying the U.S. is forcing NK into an arms race. Haha, that's just gold.

 

It's like NK is that kid on the school yard that claims he's a black belt, and is always threatening the biggest kid on the playground, but never does anything, because in reality he'd get his ass kicked.

[crispypistonx8]

Kim Jong Un saying the U.S. is forcing NK into an arms race.

Did he really say that?

[sivispacem]

 

This is true, it is POSSIBLE, but it's not mostly not done, because it's inefficient and costs too much. I've read several articles that this technology is actually available, and is being tested here and there, but these are just 1-2 years old, there hasn't been much progress on protecting commercial sectors about this kind of threat, and it's impossible to protect the complete power grid as well.

What do you mean "mostly not done" and "1-2 years old"? There's been a doctrine of reinforcing all military systems against EMP damage that's prevailed in the US for over 50 years now. Some critical infrastructure is protected, some isn't- telecommunications carriers in the US, for instance, have to demonstrate a degree of radiation hardness in their systems. I really don't know where you've got the idea that radiation hardening in a new phenomenon- it's existed almost as long as system-on-chip designs have and is very prevalent.

 

 

The damage done by starfish prime can not be compared to today as well. Systems work completely different nowadays, and there's no way to know whether these systems would survive an EMP attack or not, it's purely speculative. So we have to go for the worst case scenario, and that is the complete failure of power in case of an EMP.

It can if the majority of damage caused by Starfish Prime (that is, the damage to electrical power generation) was caused by an element of the EMP which doesn't affect embedded systems particularly due to frequency, but does long-distance cabling.

 

 

Main infrastructure yes, but not the stations that connect these systems. They all switched to modern computers, if they fail the whole system fails.

You do know that pretty much all modern critical infrastructure has many layers of redundancy, including remote redundancies which enable the proper operation of SCADA systems in the event of a catastrophic failure? The basic tenet of how modern critical infrastructure works is that it is not fail-deadly; that is, if some of it fails, it must keep operating. The idea that some substations, transmission centres or other intermediate systems failing would bring the whole network down is the work of Hollywood fiction.

 

 

The problem here is that NK might be getting information from Iran, and they are far more advanced.

I would argue that in terms of nuclear design and technology, Iran are less developed. They're not even been able to domestically produce centrifuges until very recently, whereas the DPRK have made them for a decade.

[A loaded rifle]

When thinking about this topic for a while, I can't seem to get this quote out of my head.

 

 

Anyways, I have full confidence in our Military forces, and sh*t, I might be fighting in this conflict if it becomes a damn war before 10 more years.

[Sunrise Driver]

China most likely will be neutral. Surely NK is their commie comrade but trade, business agreements with SK and money is all that really matters. China has tired of its poor begging neighbor. They prefer to do business with capitalist SK.

[JunioR-Snell]

I'll have to watch it on the news, since I'm from the UK >.>

 

They're all crazy. I don't know what's wrong in their mind, but that Ying Ming guy is off his trolly. Does he really think he can take out the US with a Nuclear Bomb without destroying their own country? If he does send one off, we're all doomed..

[018361]

Looks like North Korea shut down that factory I mentioned earlier.

 

" North Korea on Wednesday stirred up fresh unease in Northeast Asia, blocking hundreds of South Koreans from entering a joint industrial complex that serves as an important symbol of cooperation between the two countries.

The move comes a day after Pyongyang announced plans to restart a nuclear reactor it shut down five years ago and follows weeks of bombastic threats against the United States and South Korea from the North's young leader, Kim Jong Un, and his government. " -CNN

 

http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/03/world/asia/k...ions/index.html

[Hannibal Barca]

All self serving totalitarian regimes come crashing to the ground eventually.

 

The oppressed always find a way. Wont be pretty though.

[Lelouch The Zero]

Korea tried to pull this sh*t before with Hawaii. Or was that Brazil who tried to nuke Hawaii? I can't remember.

[Max]

 

Korea tried to pull this sh*t before with Hawaii. Or was that Brazil who tried to nuke Hawaii? I can't remember.

Are you, by any chance, thinking of the Attack on Pearl Harbour in Hawaii, by the Japanese?

 

Because otherwise I have no idea what you're talking about. Brazil?!

[Lelouch The Zero]

Korea tried to pull this sh*t before with Hawaii. Or was that Brazil who tried to nuke Hawaii? I can't remember.

Are you, by any chance, thinking of the Attack on Pearl Harbour in Hawaii, by the Japanese?

 

Because otherwise I have no idea what you're talking about. Brazil?!

No, somebody nuked or tried to nuke Hawaii in 2007. But i'm not sure who did, it was all over the news. It may have been a test nuke. I'm not entirely sure. I tried looking it up but there are somany links I'm not sure which one I am looking for is the real one.

[lil weasel]

Korea tried to pull this sh*t before with Hawaii. Or was that Brazil who tried to nuke Hawaii? I can't remember.

Are you, by any chance, thinking of the Attack on Pearl Harbour in Hawaii, by the Japanese? Because otherwise I have no idea what you're talking about. Brazil?!

No. No... It's the U.S. Army that's going to bomb Hawaii:

 

QUOTE (Military to continue bombing nuclear waste dumps in Hawaii Published by jalbertini on December 12th @ 2012 )

Comments on Dec. 12, 2012 NRC meeting with the Army in Maryland from 10AM-1PM Hawaii time. The public could listen in and make comments/ask questions at the end of the meeting.   The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) will be issuing a license for the mongoose to guard the hen house in Hawaii.  The Army will be issued an NRC license to possess Depleted uranium (DU) in Hawaii at Schofield Barracks and the Pohakuloa Training Area (PTA).  In effect, the NRC is licensing Hawaii nuclear waste dumps and allowing those dumps to be bombed, spreading the nuclear dump debris wherever the wind takes it. The State Dept. of Health made no comment, nor did it ask any questions, following the meeting.  It is a fact that DU exists at Schofield Barracks and PTA, and perhaps other present and former military sites in Hawaii, including Kaho’olawe and Makua Valley.  How much is not known. A minimum of 700, perhaps more than 2000, DU Davy Crockett spotting rounds have been fired at Pohakuloa.  Less than 1% of PTA’s 133,000-acres have been surveyed. DU cluster bombs, and more than a dozen DU penetrating rounds, DU bunker busters, etc. may also have been fired at PTA and elsewhere. All branches of the US military use DU weapons today.  It’s clear to me that we cannot rely on so called regulators to fix the problem. Nuclear regulators are just as much part of the problem as bank regulators. The DOH is also part of the problem. Where have our health officials been all these years on the issue. The military in Hawaii has lied and use deception repeatedly.  The US military mission goes before concern for the health and safety of its own troops and Hawaii’s people and land. Uranium is now showing up in Big Island residents’ urine.  Is it related to PTA, Fukushima or what? The people have a right to know.  Is the military above the law?  What’s needed is a peoples’ movement of non-violent resistance to stop the bombing to protect the people and land of Hawaii against attacks by the U.S. military.   North Korea Approves Nuclear Attack On U.S. 'Merciless' Strike 'Ratified,' According To Rhetoric Reuters | Posted: 04/03/2013 4:31 pm EDT | Updated: 04/03/2013 5:05 pm EDT

[Apex.]

I've got a quick question, I ain't the smartest when it comes to the Military and such, but say North Korea does launch a missile at the US, would there be a ground invasion of North Korea or would they be bombed?

[chsJO]

Live in South Korea. Recive question.

[lil weasel]

[...] ay North Korea does launch a missile at the US, would there be a ground invasion of North Korea or would they be bombed?

It would most likely be bombing. It's quicker. And the U.S. has plenty of experience doing it. There would be no reason to use Ground Troops, as there is no Oil to protect.

[Ryan]

 

I've got a quick question, I ain't the smartest when it comes to the Military and such, but say North Korea does launch a missile at the US, would there be a ground invasion of North Korea or would they be bombed?

The US would likely launch air strikes against North Korea at first. American aircraft, such as the B2 Stealth Bomber have the capability to carry a significant armament and the range to fly from the continental United States, deliver the goods, and return back home. Such airstrikes would likely target key North Korean targets and render them incapable of any further action or nuclear development.

 

The possibility exists for these airstrikes to be followed by an US-led multi-national invasion. Presently the US has approximately 30,000 troops stationed in South Korea, which is significantly less than the standing North Korean army of 1.1 million, so thousands of soldiers would have to be transported to the Korean peninsula. It is unlikely that only the United States would invade North Korea given their close relationship with China, and the fact that another war would be hugely unpopular with the American people coming off exists in Iraq and Afghanistan in recent years, but if it were to happen, I can only imagine it happening with multi-national assistance.

[d0mm2k8]

Doesn't an attack on a NATO member state count as an attack on all NATO members? So if North Korea actually attacked the US, all of the NATO member states would have to respond in some form which is quite a few countries. I'm pretty sure this happened after 9/11.

[El Dildo]

somebody nuked or tried to nuke Hawaii in 2007.

put down the crack pipe and step away from the keyboard.

 

thanks.

[ForumName]

 

Doesn't an attack on a NATO member state count as an attack on all NATO members? So if North Korea actually attacked the US, all of the NATO member states would have to respond in some form which is quite a few countries. I'm pretty sure this happened after 9/11.

Exactly. If they really did attack us practically all of Europe and more would invade them.

 

Also, Fat Boy just said

that its military has been cleared to wage an attack on the U.S. using "smaller, lighter and diversified nuclear" weapons.

[OchyGTA]

Doesn't an attack on a NATO member state count as an attack on all NATO members? So if North Korea actually attacked the US, all of the NATO member states would have to respond in some form which is quite a few countries. I'm pretty sure this happened after 9/11.

Yes Article Five, if used by the U.S. would cause all other NATO members to respond although I can't imagine they would resort to this considering a number of NATO nations have troops deployed in Afghanistan (aside from their own military commitments i.e. France in Mali). In addition to this, unlike the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq, the U.S. would be provided with an ally in South Korea who would commit a strong military presence. No doubt the U.S. would expect the more senior members of NATO such as Britain and Germany to assist in someway, whether that's through ground troops or air support I am not sure.

[walkingsickness]

America, we are known for going to war and f*cking up other peoples way of living

N.Korea threatening us is like a cockroach running up to me trying to punk me...

 

...I think I can still go to bed easily at night.

 

btw @VoiceoftheVoiceless, I think that was also N.Korea in 2007. They claimed that

their rocket (with the technology that they have at that time) could reach Hawaii

and Guam, I think. I'm not going to look for the specific news clip but I'm fairly

sure. They never fired it off though. We had nuke ships in position for counterattacks.

Edited April 4, 2013 by walkingsickness

[Mista J]

I don't keep up with the whole government things, but does NK even have warheads that can reach the US? I heard they're gonna try and bomb military bases. If they're making serious threats, IMO it's time to start warming up the B-2's.

[ForumName]

I don't keep up with the whole government things, but does NK even have warheads that can reach the US? I heard they're gonna try and bomb military bases. If they're making serious threats, IMO it's time to start warming up the B-2's.

They're not serious. I also don't think they even have rockets that can reach Hawaii, even if they did I KNOW they haven't menaturized a nuke small enough to fit on the tip of a warhead. Although the same thing happens every time they've tested a nuke and I am willing to bet it's going to happen again and the result will not be pretty. From what I remember the order goes something like this

 

(1) They test a nuke

(2) Security council imposes more sanctions

(3) They begin their saber rattling

(4) Joint drills with South Korea begin

(5) All communication with the South cut off

(6) The closing of the Kaesong factory

(7) The drills end

(8) An attack on South Korea

 

They have attacked South Korea before, they sunk one of their ships, and even bombed a small island of theirs killing around fifty-five or so people in total. The President of the South has declared that they will respond strongly to any act of aggression this time around. We're on number six, we'll see what happens next.

 

 

[GTA2THACORE]

Bring on them warheads, because will put a boot in your a$$ the american way!!!