North korea Nuke threat to USA.

page: 7
32
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 24 2013 @ 04:13 PM
link   
reply to post by drsfinest72
 

Not sure if it's been posted yet, but Reuters also did a story on this:

"We are not disguising the fact that the various satellites and long-range rockets that we will fire and the high-level nuclear test we will carry out are targeted at the United States," North Korea's National Defence Commission said, according to state news agency KCNA.

Reuters




posted on Jan, 24 2013 @ 04:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Chamberf=6
reply to post by drsfinest72
 

Not sure if it's been posted yet, but Reuters also did a story on this:

"We are not disguising the fact that the various satellites and long-range rockets that we will fire and the high-level nuclear test we will carry out are targeted at the United States," North Korea's National Defence Commission said, according to state news agency KCNA.

Reuters


Ah, so that stuff about the previous rocket being a "communications satellite" was all overly fermented kimchi, just as everybody thought.



posted on Jan, 24 2013 @ 04:20 PM
link   
I suppose it would be prudent to install my backup servers East of Spokane before the Red Dawn.



posted on Jan, 24 2013 @ 04:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by nenothtu

Originally posted by woogleuk
reply to post by EL1A5
 


Could be wrong, but I am fairly certain modern nuclear weapons are designed to minimise spread and contamination.


It depends on a lot of variables - yield, burst altitude, weather patterns that day, etc. Only ground bursts - where the fireball incinerates part of the ground, leaving a crater - yield any fallout at all, and this minimizes damage radius, so you're not getting as much bang for your buck. If you pop it high enough to make a big damage radius on the ground, it's not close enough to the surface to generate any fallout.


That's not true, though a ground burst could enhance it with neutron-activated materials which would be worse than neutron-activated air.

A significant portion of the danger from the fallout is from the fission products themselves, the remnants of the uranium and plutonium which released energy, and activation of the external case. This comes no matter if the bomb goes off on the surface or in the air.

Since most of the yield of even thermonuclear weapons (except 'neutron bombs') is in fission of the secondary's casing, the fallout from larger weapons is even more severe. The US, Russian and Chinese strategic-size weapons are absolutely awful on fallout.
edit on 24-1-2013 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)
edit on 24-1-2013 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 24 2013 @ 04:24 PM
link   
reply to post by chrome413
 


Tell me where Iran said it wants to wipe a country off the Earth.



posted on Jan, 24 2013 @ 04:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by iwilliam
Just out of curiosity-- someone more knowledgeable than myself-- please tell me what would be the political consequences for the US if we nuked these fanatics back into the stone age, ASAP?


Our allies the South Koreans would be very angry because they view North Koreans as kinsmen (often literally) imprisoned by fanatic tyrants with the emotional maturity of an autistic toddler.

The consequences of an unjustly harsh war against NK average population would break the alliance with South Korea (they would elect a government opposed to the treaty) and hurt the U.S. military capability in that region, enhancing China's relative strength.

edit on 24-1-2013 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)
edit on 24-1-2013 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)
edit on 24-1-2013 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 24 2013 @ 04:27 PM
link   
Well this is certainly very disconcerting.

Looking at this thread, and the one about China's smog, I fear we may be closer to a Blade Runner future. We already have Mars One (trying to develop an off world colony), and I don't know how much longer we'll have actual robotic pets and androids.

It's truly becoming a Dickian future.



posted on Jan, 24 2013 @ 04:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by woogleuk
reply to post by EL1A5
 


Could be wrong, but I am fairly certain modern nuclear weapons are designed to minimise spread and contamination.


You are wrong, other than, perhaps, the "bunker busting" types. However, those are still designed to destroy heavily defended subterranean targets (which are remarkably difficult to destroy, even with nuclear weaponry), and containment of the fallout is a secondary goal, not really achievable.
edit on 24-1-2013 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 24 2013 @ 04:32 PM
link   
I'm not too worried. North Korea's military is pretty pathetic, they hardly have a Navy, or an Air Force. Even if they launched a missile at us, we'd shoot it down before it reached Midway. Then they'd be in a lot of trouble, not just with us, but the rest of the western world.

North Korea is like a kid I knew in school (who will remain nameless). He liked to mouth off, and make threats, then he'd get his ass kicked, but he would still antagonize people just for the attention, I guess. NK knows they couldn't do anything to us, they just like to shout their mouths off.

I won't lose any sleep over them.



posted on Jan, 24 2013 @ 04:42 PM
link   
reply to post by MystikMushroom
 

I don't know, if i were a small dictator with a country full of starving people i would want to be riding one of these things too.

Asian Unicorns

It's better then telling them you found a cave full of this, which is the best they could have found.
Real Asian Unicorn
Which are cute, but not really intimidating.



posted on Jan, 24 2013 @ 04:46 PM
link   
reply to post by dave_welch
 


That's what I'm saying. If their neighbor to the west start feeling froggy like they're going to support them then we'd have a bigger situation but nothing the ole USofA couldn't take care of in a couple days time.



posted on Jan, 24 2013 @ 04:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aquarius2150
Just read this while I was havin' a smoke, I choked on my cigarette....


From BBC News


"We do not hide that the various satellites and long-range rockets we will continue to launch, as well as the high-level nuclear test we will proceed with, are aimed at our arch-enemy the United States," KCNA quoted it as saying. "Settling accounts with the US needs to be done with force, not with words," it added.


Well that is just plain scary. Can't we take out that country already? Send all the troops that are in Iraq, Iran, Afganistan, where ever else and send ALL of them to NK.

/Side Note. Twitter is going Bat $#!t crazy right now about this....
edit on 23-1-2013 by Aquarius2150 because: sidenote

They wont get much from invading a country like North Korea, which is all they care about anyways. If they actually cared about threats then they would have dealt with north korea long ago instead of invading the middle east.



posted on Jan, 24 2013 @ 04:56 PM
link   
Out of all of this...did anyone forget about Russia?

They would love to join North Korea (If it's an organized attack)



posted on Jan, 24 2013 @ 05:00 PM
link   


I'm not too worried. North Korea's military is pretty pathetic, they hardly have a Navy, or an Air Force. Even if they launched a missile at us, we'd shoot it down before it reached Midway. Then they'd be in a lot of trouble, not just with us, but the rest of the western world.
reply to post by dave_welch
 

Just like the US intercepted the airliners on 911?
Lord help us then.
Regards, Iwinder



posted on Jan, 24 2013 @ 05:38 PM
link   
reply to post by Iwinder
 


Not even close to being the same thing.



posted on Jan, 24 2013 @ 05:42 PM
link   
Its safe to say that North Korea has no value and would hardly be missed, if nuked out of existence. Let's make it happen!



posted on Jan, 24 2013 @ 05:50 PM
link   
reply to post by drsfinest72
 


While is is newsworthy, I personally believe it is mostly "saber rattling".
Not that we shouldn't prepare for the worst mind you. NK keeps doing and saying
crazy stuff to keep it's people busy, and not thinking about how hungry they are.



posted on Jan, 24 2013 @ 05:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by mbkennel

That's not true, though a ground burst could enhance it with neutron-activated materials which would be worse than neutron-activated air.



It absolutely is true. You seem to be confusing immediate effects with residual effects. Fallout is a residual effect.



A significant portion of the danger from the fallout is from the fission products themselves, the remnants of the uranium and plutonium which released energy, and activation of the external case. This comes no matter if the bomb goes off on the surface or in the air.


In the case of fallout, ALL of the danger is from the fission products themselves. At issue is what they are mixed with to produce the fallout - just the bomb, or the bomb and several tons of what used to be ground, buildings, people, and pets. If the fireball itself does not touch the ground, there is no significant vaporization of admixture products, and no appreciable fallout.



Since most of the yield of even thermonuclear weapons (except 'neutron bombs') is in fission of the secondary's casing, the fallout from larger weapons is even more severe. The US, Russian and Chinese strategic-size weapons are absolutely awful on fallout.


"More severe" is a relative notion. It's relative to "less severe". Of course a strategic weapon is going to be "more severe" than a tactical one, because it's bigger. It's not severe enough, however, to produce significant fallout in the absence of "stuff" to make fallout from.

No ground contact of fireball = no appreciable fallout. There just isn't enough "stuff" there to make any appreciable fallout from.



posted on Jan, 24 2013 @ 06:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by nuke_c
reply to post by drsfinest72
 


While is is newsworthy, I personally believe it is mostly "saber rattling".
Not that we shouldn't prepare for the worst mind you. NK keeps doing and saying
crazy stuff to keep it's people busy, and not thinking about how hungry they are.


I agree, kind of like Wall mart having a sale when people have no jobs.

Regards, Iwinder



posted on Jan, 24 2013 @ 06:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by mbkennelThe consequences of an unjustly harsh war against NK average population would break the alliance with South Korea (they would elect a government opposed to the treaty) and hurt the U.S. military capability in that region, enhancing China's relative strength.


Taking into account the fact the South Korean government is rife with corruption, and it is starting to wind the people up something chronic, a revolt and swift elections could very well be on the cards in the near future.





new topics
top topics
 
32
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join