Skip to comments.
Risking a nuclear attack now vs later. (SOMEONE has to say it.)
Dangus
Posted on 08/10/2017 8:07:36 AM PDT by dangus
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-66 next last
To: DCBryan1
41
posted on
08/10/2017 11:30:01 AM PDT
by
dfwgator
To: blueunicorn6
The Chinese have a history with Korea. The Koreans are going to be a bit wary of them.Koreans hate the Japanese even more.
42
posted on
08/10/2017 11:31:19 AM PDT
by
dfwgator
To: Old Yeller
43
posted on
08/10/2017 11:32:24 AM PDT
by
dfwgator
To: dfwgator
Very hard to figure out.
A. Smart humans always act in what they THINK is their best interests.
B. Very clever people can try to APPEAR dumb or mad in order to fool their enemies.
What do we have here? Kim could be the Puppet Madman of China, he could truly have the power it appears he has and could be playing a game for show, or...??
The likelihood of him being truly crazy and his own people not finding a way to take him out to save themselves is VERY LOW. The military and other NK leaders would be in the 9/11 Let’s Roll frame of mind.
44
posted on
08/10/2017 12:36:23 PM PDT
by
Yaelle
(We have a Crisis of Information in this country. Our enemies hold the megaphone.)
To: All
Luckily for us, the people who make decisions on these matters have resources beyond NukeMap to base them on.
To: Vinnie
I read it put some 3-4 hundred street lights out in HI. In reality it had no significant effect. Also keep in mind the bomb used was nearly 1.5 megaton yield. I don't think NK has anywhere near the technology to duplicate even this test much less take out the grid in the entire US.
I feel pretty certain the true nuclear powers (US Included) have long since abandoned the idea of using EMP as an effective weapon.
To: Garth Tater
Your ugly, condescending tone is utterly misplaced, since I explicitly (and oddly for a forum like FR) noted, “FOR DISCUSSION ONLY: I’M NOT AN EXPERT...” proceeding to invite comment. Had you not written like such a blowhard, (and not been so obviously wrong), I might have appreciated your comments.
Every nuclear device the North Koreans have tested has been ground-based. While there are very advanced technologies in developing the most effective ground-penetrating warhead possible, it’s not nearly as difficult to create a bomb that can withstand terminal velocity.
Yes, you MAY destroy a mid-air-detonating warhead by knocking it into the ground, but even one NOT designed to survive such an accidental impact may very well survive it, and could even be accidentally triggered, like the Goldsboro bomb almost was. That’s right: it’s so damned easy to build an impact-detonating bomb we damned near made one accidentally.
It’s very plain that the North Koreans ARE working hard at overcoming limitations in their nuclear capabilities. DUH. That’s why I suggested we needed to do something sooner rather than later. Hopefully, that something avoids an attempted nuclear strike. Only a complete idiot would read what I wrote as saying “Yay! Let’s get bombed by the North Koreans!” But if — God forbid — Kim proves his insanity we will survive as a nation.
47
posted on
08/10/2017 12:46:56 PM PDT
by
dangus
To: Ancesthntr
Thanks! Your answer gave me some reference points for further reading on the subject. I was aware of the “starfish” test over the Pacific that caused some issues in Hawaii but it did not plunge them back to the stone age... It seems precluded that this type of weapon would be a sure success and I was not sure of the basis for that. I had a coworker that used to go to Vegas to watch the tests so that should have been brutal on their grid and I wandered why it was not.
To: precisionshootist
The good news: North Korea’s bombs would probably be smaller, perhaps much smaller, than Hiroshima’s. That bomb was 1% the size of the one which affected Hawaii.
The bad news: payload has little to do with the effect of an EMP, beyond making its reach arithmetically wider. And duplicating that test WOULD have taken out the grid in the entire U.S had it been over the middle of the U.S. Even a Hiroshima-sized bomb would’ve done very bad things, if launched high in the atmosphere.
The not-so-bad news: We’re better prepared than we were.
The still better news: Getting their missile up high enough to have the maximum EMP effect would also require that their missile expend all of its energy on height, so that it could never reach the mainland.
Why we need to act: They’re getting better and better missiles all the time.
49
posted on
08/10/2017 12:54:25 PM PDT
by
dangus
To: backwoods-engineer
“So, yes, I’m all for nuking the Norks if it prevents that. On the other hand, if we hit them, the Chinese might EMP us in retaliation, which comes to the same thing.
2 posted on 8/10/2017, 10:12:58 AM by backwoods-engineer (Trump won; I celebrated; I’m good. Let’s get on with the civil war now.)”
While I share your concerns about the effects of an EMP attack (which would have to be executed well, with top-notch equipment - something that NK probably can’t do NOW), I think that your statement about China is 100% off.
First, if China attacks us with an EMP, what are we going to do, play tiddlywinks? Nope, Trump (or whomever is in charge) will light up China BUT GOOD.
Second, even if you had an Obama-type President who wouldn’t hit back even if millions of us were killed in an attack, China would STILL suffer greatly, since our economy would tank so much that the Great Depression would look like good times. China depends entirely on exports, and we are their biggest customer. Also, good luck to them in trying to collect on nearly $1 trillion of US Treasury bonds if they kill half or more of our population. A President who didn’t even cancel that debt in such circumstances would be assassinated by someone in his inner circle who lost family in the attack.
So, NO, China isn’t going to EMP us. Not when the choice is between us and North $hitholestan.
50
posted on
08/10/2017 12:55:28 PM PDT
by
Ancesthntr
("The right to buy weapons is the right to be free." A. E. van Vogt)
To: dangus
Your ugly, condescending tone is utterly misplaced, since I explicitly (and oddly for a forum like FR) noted, FOR DISCUSSION ONLY: IM NOT AN EXPERT..
I didn't think it was ugly, but you are right about the condescension. "NOT AN EXPERT" and "FOR DISCUSSION ONLY" doesn't justify your war mongering but if you are going to do it I would appreciate it if you put a little more thought into your efforts. It's kind of hard to "discuss" your ideas without pointing out the errors in your assumptions right up front.
While there are very advanced technologies in developing the most effective ground-penetrating warhead possible, its not nearly as difficult to create a bomb that can withstand terminal velocity.
Spoken like a true expert - which you have admitted you are not. Attaching a proximity detector (bought off the shelf right over the border in China) vs developing a nuclear weapon that can detonate after hitting the ground. Yeah, right, those two are in the same ball park and yet you said that it would have to be detonated on impact and hence less destructive than a detonation at height... kind of makes the rest of your post worthless when you screw up that early in your "discussion." An intentionally dirty nuke detonated over a large city can kill millions but with your caveat that it has to be detonated on impact you throw out that possibility and talk about a few hundred casualties. Yep. Lot's of condescension in my tone.
Thats right: its so damned easy to build an impact-detonating bomb we damned near made one accidentally.
And you know that it almost went off how? Ah, your "expert" opinion again.
Only a complete idiot would read what I wrote as saying Yay! Lets get bombed by the North Koreans!
Only a complete idiot would say that we can attack a nuclear and biologically armed nation and expect to suffer only a few hundred casualties.
51
posted on
08/10/2017 1:54:39 PM PDT
by
Garth Tater
(What's mine is mine.)
To: Garth Tater
>> An intentionally dirty nuke detonated over a large city can kill millions <<
Ridiculous, absurd, unadulterated nonsense. You obviously not only know not one bloody thing about what you’re writing about, you’re too lazy and/or stupid to validate your own ignorant statements by looking something up on the internet.
>> And you know that it almost went off how? <<
Government documents declassified in 2013 of Parker F Jones, supervisor of nuclear weapons safety at Sandia National Labs, writing on October 22, 1969 criticizing yet concurring with the assessment by Dr. Ralph Lapp, formerly of the Manhattan Project, made in 1962:
“Lapp’s report lacks objectivity and accuracy. His sources of information are patently erroneous, or he chooses to misuse them for his own benefit. But the central point is correctly stated: one single, dynamo-technology switch stood between the United States and a major catastrophe...”
Again... this isn’t even a bomb designed to detonate on impact; this was a bomb designed to detonate in the air, which almost spontaneously detonated on the ground.
52
posted on
08/10/2017 8:50:54 PM PDT
by
dangus
To: Garth Tater
Just so you can appreciate precisely how stupid your notion that a dirty bomb could kill millions is:
“A dirty bomb (RDD) is not a weapon of mass destruction.” — Center for Disease Control.
“In 1987, in Brazil, thieves stole Caesium and distributed it throughout a local population. The effect was similar to a dirty bomb explosion. Despite the International Atomic Energy Agency calling it one of the worlds worst radiological incidents, only four lives were lost.”
“The primary threat of dirty bombs are not direct loss of life, but of potentially life-threatening mass panic and economic dislocation.”
“A similarly sized conventional bomb would likely be deadlier than a dirty bomb (RDD), causing death primarily through a shock wave. The chief threat of a dirty bomb would from the ensuing panic.”
53
posted on
08/10/2017 9:03:22 PM PDT
by
dangus
To: dangus
Just so you can appreciate precisely how stupid your notion that a dirty bomb could kill millions is:
A dirty bomb (RDD) is not a weapon of mass destruction. Center for Disease Control.
I did not say "a dirty bomb" I said "An intentionally dirty nuke". They are not at all the same thing. A dirty bomb is a conventional bomb that spews radioactive waste over a small area and a dirty nuke is a nuclear weapon designed specifically to spread highly radioactive isotopes such as strontium-90 and caesium-131 across hundreds of square miles. These isotopes, if incorporated into the construction of a nuclear weapon, will still be killing people for generations after the dirty nuke explodes. Damn dude, you really need to stick to subjects you are a least marginally familiar with.
54
posted on
08/10/2017 10:37:07 PM PDT
by
Garth Tater
(What's mine is mine.)
To: dangus
The bomb that "almost" exploded descended on it's parachute. It did not hit the ground (or the water in this case) at terminal velocity.
Wikipedia:
"Three of the four arming mechanisms on one of the bombs activated, causing it to execute many of the steps needed to arm itself, such as charging the firing capacitors and, critically, deployment of a 100-foot-diameter (30 m) retard parachute. The parachute allowed that bomb to hit the ground with little damage."
So, to prove me wrong when I said your scenario of a nuclear armed missile detonating on impact was bullhockey you gave an an example of a nuclear weapon descending under its parachute... Are you about ready to give up yet?
55
posted on
08/10/2017 10:56:05 PM PDT
by
Garth Tater
(What's mine is mine.)
To: Garth Tater
Ooh, gee... The North Koreans wil NEVER figure out how to build a parachute!
56
posted on
08/11/2017 4:37:03 AM PDT
by
dangus
To: dangus
"Ooh, gee... The North Koreans wil NEVER figure out how to build a parachute!"
Oh gee dummy,
you are the one that said, and I quote:
"A mid-air on-target detonation would require very sensitive timing, so presumably it would be impact-triggered, and therefore ground-level."
and then you told us that this ground level detonation would, and again, I quote:
"result in only hundreds of deaths,"
So, you continued, we should attack North Korea now
before they improve their technology to the point where in the future they could kill "tens of millions" of us with a mid-air detonation.
So, if our casualties would be reduced from tens of millions to a few hundred because North Korea is unable to determine
when to detonate their incoming warhead
how is it now possible for them to release a parachute on their incoming missile at the proper time when you have already stated that they are currently unable to determine this proper time? Logically speaking, you're sort of stepping all over your toes here Dangus.
I'm not even going to go into your stupidity of conflating the difficulty of deploying a parachute from a missile at incoming terminal velocity with deploying a parachute from a bomb dropped from an airplane since I think you have already embarrassed yourself enough with your war mongering idiocy on this thread. Have a nice day.
57
posted on
08/11/2017 10:46:49 AM PDT
by
Garth Tater
(What's mine is mine.)
To: backwoods-engineer
pop a nuke, even a small one, about 400 miles above Kansas. The resulting EMP burst would likely bring down the power grid in the US for months, if not years. Some projections I've seen predict more than 200 million people would die from starvation, disease, violence, privation, and secondary effectsThat is not true.
58
posted on
08/11/2017 10:49:44 AM PDT
by
Jim Noble
(Single payer is coming. Which kind do you like?)
To: Shanty Shaker
Read about
EMP in the real world.
59
posted on
08/11/2017 10:52:48 AM PDT
by
Jim Noble
(Single payer is coming. Which kind do you like?)
To: Vinnie
IIRC an airburst H-bomb over the Pacific took out the grid in HawaiiExcept you don't recall correctly.
Google "Starfish prime".
60
posted on
08/11/2017 10:55:00 AM PDT
by
Jim Noble
(Single payer is coming. Which kind do you like?)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-66 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson