Posted on 08/28/2006 11:36:56 PM PDT by DTAD
FAIRBANKS, Alaska: US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld on Sunday warned North Korea may pose a threat as a weapons seller to terrorists and that America would consider taking the nuclear warheads off intercontinental ballistic missiles so they could be used against terrorists.
Rumsfeld, in Alaska to visit a missile defense installation weeks after Pyongyang test-fired a long-range missile believed capable of reaching the United States, said North Korea is testing missiles to show the capabilities to potential buyers.
"They sell anything to anyone," he said.
(Excerpt) Read more at defencetalk.com ...
why bother removing the nukes? they seem ready to go, just as they are!
We spook other nuclear powers into launching a retaliation for what? An impractically wasteful conventional warhead delivery system?
What do we have cruise missiles and B2's for?
So the press won't freak. What do you think the front page of the NYT would look like if we were to use a nuke?
What is the travel time between an ICBM's launch point, and it's detonation at the office of the New York Times?
Yes "Virginia" there is a Santa Clause.....
ping
ICBM's never have to be on station because of their range. Unlike a B-2 or a platform for cruise missiles. Just load the targets coordinates in the computer and the ICBM is on it's way.
I never could understand why they keep pushing this pipe dream. Can they slap a 1,000 lb HE warhead on top of an ICBM or an SLBM and slide it through a window from 5,000 to 15,000 miles away? Sure they can. But why use an ICBM or an SLBM when an SSN or SSGN can do the same thing with TLAM?
Conventional warheads?... like loading popcorn in the 10 gauge to take out the mice in the barn.
For every task there is a tool. Use the right one...
The only big gov't Conservatives like is spending on the military it seems.
Why this pipedream a poster asked? With the Cold War over the need for ICBM's is not as great as it used to be - meanwhile the 'Military Industrial Complex' (per Ike) made nice business making ICBMs and now without a need for them they may be out of the money. Also, airforce generals lose the cache they have being in charge of such weapons.
The new wars America will face will be more tactical than strategic - small units of highly skilled men hunting cave dwellers with at best a working RPG. I am guessing you can't get as much profit from producing advanced boy armor or small arms and the like as you could making an ICBM.
Imagine the profits that could be made using conventional warhead ICBMs? At at least $100 million per pop that's a lot of money - especially since these ICBM's can only carry a small payload - which would mean you need multiple ICBM's to get at a target.
Cha-ching!!!!
That should read: I am guessing you can't get as much profit from producing advanced BODY armor or small arms and the like as you could making an ICBM.
I can hear it now...
"oopppss... I guess we forgot to take the nuke off THAT one, ummm and that one, and that one...and..."
hehehe...
Hmmmmm. From out here in the cheap seats, close enough to the silos to have a ringside seat for TEOTWAKI, it just doesn't look like much has changed from the bad old days.
Russia and China have new clothes, a veneer of capitalism which enriches the politicos and generals who run the shop, but is anything really different?
Observe, that while the old show of outward hostility is muted, and that the Chinese are building their manufacturing infrastructure and gaining access to not only the latest technology, but the production lines, for cheap labor and in exchange for our money. They are using this boon to build the industrial infrastructure to build a world class military force.
They are still moving the pawn of North Korea, and have a hand in the events in Iran as well.
Similarly, the Russians are pushing the pawns of Islamic jihadis by supplying arms and technology to them.
Excuse me while I recall those who 'would bury us without firing a shot', and the way they did the same thing using North Korea, and later, North Vietnam, only a few decades ago.
It is the perfect setup, actually, play the jihadis for dupes, arm them with weapons which can either inflict serious harm upon us, (we lose), force us to use the nuclear option, either pre-emptively or in reaction to attack (we lose through destruction or world outcry), or permit us and the jihadis to mutually anihillate one another (we still lose).
Whatever the scenario, they have the ability to sit back and deny culpability, and remain off the target list.
In the event we prevail and destroy the jihadis, and remain a viable nation and military force in the world, they still have the Muslim menace off their doorstep.
Win, win, win, for them.
They are still making inroads into Central and South America as well.
There is still a 'Cold War' going on, it is just more sophisticated than the last version.
If Rummy and Co. want to deliver precision payloads, we have the means, but save the missiles for the big one.
Seems like an expensive way to do the job, but perhaps they want to develop some actual experience using the systems.
There was a thread on this earlier today.
One of the hypothesis was that one of these rockets would be a great bunker buster.
It takes 20 minutes for the rocket to get to the target, and if it is an underground station, it won't be going anywhere.
Acronym Police on Duty.
"TEOTWAKI"
Should be TEOTWAWKI.
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.