N.Korea admits to Nuclear Weapons

Trytostaydead · Post by **Trytostaydead** » 2003-04-24 02:06pm

http://www.msnbc.com/news/850567.asp?cp1=1

Well, the shit has hit the fan.

Nathan F · Post by **Nathan F** » 2003-04-24 02:28pm

Yes it has...

Well, I am just glad I live nowhere near a major city...

phongn · Post by **phongn** » 2003-04-24 02:37pm

They don't have the range to hit anything past the CONUS West Coast, and even that's iffy.

Nathan F · Post by **Nathan F** » 2003-04-24 02:50pm

phongn wrote:They don't have the range to hit anything past the CONUS West Coast, and even that's iffy.

Still though, makes me feel better.

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-04-24 02:58pm

While the US doesn't have much choice but to accept that its true, North Korea could easily be lying to give its self a stronger position. Now they expect they might get something only for destroying there existing weapons, rather then only getting something if the whole program dies.

Axis Kast · Post by **Axis Kast** » 2003-04-24 03:39pm

While I agree that N. Korea might have made such determinations, Skimmer, I hesitate to believe they are bluffing.

Either way, American policy as currently focused on N. Korea is to treat it as an emminent nuclear danger. In my opinion, we are unlikely to reward anything less than proven destruction of the whole infrastructure.

Admiral Johnason · Post by **Admiral Johnason** » 2003-04-24 06:28pm

You know what this means, when we find Saddam, Kim will find out what an American asskick feels like.

Post by **Beowulf** » 2003-04-24 06:53pm

I'm glad I'm not near any big targets on the west coast... I'm sure Seattle is a better target at least...

Shinova · Post by **Shinova** » 2003-04-24 07:30pm

phongn wrote:They don't have the range to hit anything past the CONUS West Coast, and even that's iffy.

"CONUS West Coast"

What's that?

Shinova · Post by **Shinova** » 2003-04-24 07:31pm

Shinova wrote:
phongn wrote:They don't have the range to hit anything past the CONUS West Coast, and even that's iffy.
"CONUS West Coast"

What's that?

Wait, does that mean continental United States?

Joe · Post by **Joe** » 2003-04-24 07:32pm

Continental US, correct. They only have delivery systems capable of hitting the West Coast at best.

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-04-24 07:48pm

Durran Korr wrote:Continental US, correct. They only have delivery systems capable of hitting the West Coast at best.

They have a design that could do it, but they ceased missile tests before it was fired. Generally you need 15-20 tests at the minimal to get an IRBM or ICBM operational.

lukexcom · Post by **lukexcom** » 2003-04-24 08:06pm

True, but if they've a spare warhead and a booster, they'd probably slap it on and launch it, even though the chances of it hitting the west coast would be small. After all, once you commit yourself to using the few nukes you have, you have to use them all. Either use them or lose them.

Doesn't Moscow have a set of dedicated ABM batteries?

Tragic · Post by **Tragic** » 2003-04-24 08:06pm

What you guys think would happen if US jets hit suspected nuclear weapons facilities in N.Korea?

Like what would the N.Korean and the rest of the world do?

Justin · Post by **Justin** » 2003-04-24 08:21pm

Well, it looks like we were right to pull out of the Anti ballistic missile treaty, dosn't it. This will give the boot to the arse in congress to get the Son of Star Wars budget to pass. Also I'm curious to the Chinese and Russian response to this. I'm pretty sure the Chinese already knew, they have that whole place infiltrated with intelligence networks already, but if so why didn't they tell us, at least publicly? If they already knew and didn't tell us, what does this mean for our relationship with them? The same goes for Russia as well.

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-04-24 08:29pm

lukexcom wrote: Doesn't Moscow have a set of dedicated ABM batteries?

Yes, Moscow has had an ABM system since the 1970's. There interceptors use small nuclear warheads like the US's own 1960's program, so there's no question that they would be effective.

Post by **Gandalf** » 2003-04-24 08:44pm

Of NK's missiles can hit CONUS West Coast, can they hit Australia?

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-04-24 08:55pm

Gandalf wrote:Of NK's missiles can hit CONUS West Coast, can they hit Australia?

Yes, one of there various untested missiles could hit both, another which could only hit Alaska might be able to hit Darwin. Really the risk is being overstated. Its questionable that North Korea could even the eastern Aleutian Islands.

lukexcom · Post by **lukexcom** » 2003-04-24 09:05pm

Sea Skimmer wrote:
lukexcom wrote: Doesn't Moscow have a set of dedicated ABM batteries?
Yes, Moscow has had an ABM system since the 1970's. There interceptors use small nuclear warheads like the US's own 1960's program, so there's no question that they would be effective.

After further research, I've found out more. Maps, ABM battery specs, sat photos galore:
http://www.fas.org/spp/starwars/program ... index.html

Apparently the Soviets have two systems in Moscow:
ABM-1B: 32 SH-04 Galosh long-range missiles, 2-3Mt warhead

ABM-3: 64-68 SH-08 Gazelle short-range missiles, 10Kt warhead
...and 32-36 SH-11 Gorgon long-range missiles, 1Mt warhead

Ideally, with a total of at least 128 operational nuclear-tipped interceptor missiles, the Russians could quite possibly withstand at least the same amount of warheads dropped on Moscow, times 10 if all of those ICBMs were all MIRVs.

With sub-orbital interception occuring most likely within hundred miles of Moscow, wouldn't EMP effects be of major concern to the city?

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-04-24 09:14pm

No actually, each interceptor takes out one warhead. The system engages at a point when warhead separation has already occurred. So your not going to get to hid a full laden missile. For that you need an orbital system or something that downs then missile while its boosting.

The effect of EMP have been greatly overstated, its unlikely Moscow would be effected in anyway. And don't use FAS, the site mixes politics with its information and is poorly maintained and error ridden.

Globalsecurity is a far better site, and was founded by John Pike, who at one point worked for FAS and was responsible for maintaining and creating much of its content. It doesn't appear that FAS ever found a replacement.

LMSx · Post by **LMSx** » 2003-04-24 10:31pm

I'm glad I'm not near any big targets on the west coast... I'm sure Seattle is a better target at least...

Of course, if there are nuclear weapons capable of hitting the East coast, the US pulls no punches and threatens the use of immediate force.

Or is the Cuban Missile Crisis at all relatable to this situation?

LMSx · Post by **LMSx** » 2003-04-24 10:32pm

One more thing:

Globalsecurity is a far better site, and was founded by John Pike, who at one point worked for FAS and was responsible for maintaining and creating much of its content. It doesn't appear that FAS ever found a replacement.

Thanks for the shout-out.

I had been meaning to check globalsecurity.org after seeing the name pop up WAY too often on FNC and CNN, but I never remembered.

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2003-04-24 10:47pm

Tragic wrote:What you guys think would happen if US jets hit suspected nuclear weapons facilities in N.Korea?

Like what would the N.Korean and the rest of the world do?

Who knows? Such a move is impossible because we can't tell how extensive the operations are. The Korean peninsula is basically a big hunk of granite, and the North's hardening efforts have taken advantage of it in a quite massive way. They could have an entire reprocessing plant buried away; hiding a reactor is much harder because of the temperature difference from the cooling system.

The Soviets actually built an entire nuclear weapon production plant underground with three reactors, but the US spotted it easily. During the winter the river that passed by and was used for cooling water froze solid, but as it past the area of the complex it suddenly had open water for miles.

lukexcom · Post by **lukexcom** » 2003-04-24 10:49pm

LMSx wrote:One more thing:

Globalsecurity is a far better site, and was founded by John Pike, who at one point worked for FAS and was responsible for maintaining and creating much of its content. It doesn't appear that FAS ever found a replacement.
Thanks for the shout-out. I had been meaning to check globalsecurity.org after seeing the name pop up WAY too often on FNC and CNN, but I never remembered.

Same thing here. It looks good, although there are a few copy-paste jobs from FAS, from what I can tell by scanning. But that's alright if he wrote it or got permission for it. I mean, if the original's good and you can get it on your site, then why bother re-writing the bible, so to speak?

phongn · Post by **phongn** » 2003-04-24 10:56pm

Sea Skimmer wrote:No actually, each interceptor takes out one warhead. The system engages at a point when warhead separation has already occurred. So your not going to get to hid a full laden missile. For that you need an orbital system or something that downs then missile while its boosting.

You could also engage shortly after separation, like how Spartan was intended. The RVs are still spaced closely enough to get destroyed by a single ABM warhead.

Aren't there some rumors that Moscow may be getting hit-to-kill warheads?