Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 112

Thread: North Korea nuke test

  1. #31
    Official Thread Jacker Senior Contributor gunnut's Avatar
    Join Date
    27 Jan 06
    Location
    DPRK, Demokratik People's Republik of Kalifornia
    Posts
    23,772
    Quote Originally Posted by Stitch View Post
    Besides, you can BET that the US Air Force Global Strike Command has a few strategic assets already pre-programmed with the coordinates of North Korea's one or two launch facilities; we could have a couple of W87's headed for North Korea in a matter of minutes.
    Is NK still under Russia's nuclear umbrella? Was it ever? During the Soviet times?
    "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

  2. #32
    Military Professional
    Join Date
    06 Aug 03
    Posts
    29,353
    Quote Originally Posted by gunnut View Post
    Is NK still under Russia's nuclear umbrella?
    Nope. China offered. The Kims declined.

    Quote Originally Posted by gunnut View Post
    Was it ever? During the Soviet times?
    In a roundabout way. Soviet forces in North Korea were protected by the Strategic Rocket Forces.
    Chimo

  3. #33
    Senior Contributor Stitch's Avatar
    Join Date
    14 Nov 06
    Location
    Patterson, CA
    Posts
    3,080
    Quote Originally Posted by gunnut View Post
    Is NK still under Russia's nuclear umbrella? Was it ever? During the Soviet times?
    I don't know a whole lot about OPLAN 8010-12, but I'm sure somewhere in there is a contingency for a nuclear option directed against a belligerent state; I'm assuming that would involve air, missile and submarine-launched nuclear options against an aggressor state like NK (although, come to think of it, a D5 might be a better option for NorK, since they have a really big ocean on their eastern border; shorter flight time and probably more accurate).

    Suspicion confirmed: according to FAS, "The base plan (OPLAN 8010) is thought to be directed against six potential adversaries: Russia, China, North Korea, Iran, Syria, and WMD attacks by non-state actors."
    Last edited by Stitch; 12 Jan 16, at 04:20.
    "There is never enough time to do or say all the things that we would wish. The thing is to try to do as much as you can in the time that you have. Remember Scrooge, time is short, and suddenly, you're not there any more." -Ghost of Christmas Present, Scrooge

  4. #34
    Military Professional
    Join Date
    06 Aug 03
    Posts
    29,353
    Take this with a truck load of salt. At this point, I have zero trust in all non-classified expertise. Kristensen is a hack. In one year, he gone from 65 Pakistani nukes to 85 Pakistani nukes with zero explaination with the difference. I know the explaination, an open source congress reporting by a US Admiral with ZERO stating of Pakistani numbers.

    This freaking lot is still stating that North Korea can nuke LA with a 10kt SLBM when all evidence is that North Korea has met with test failures left, right, and centre.

    Other than absolutely verifiable numbers, I would not trust this lot to buy baby milk.

    For fuck sakes, they did us a favour by presenting a realistic picture of the Chinese nuclear arsenal, then, they proceeded to lie about the Israeli, Pakistani, Indian, and now North Korean nuclear arsenal ... especially when the last was presented with fucking facts!

    Armscontrolwonk, Dr Jefferies' blog, is extremely silent about the NK test - why?
    Chimo

  5. #35
    Official Thread Jacker Senior Contributor gunnut's Avatar
    Join Date
    27 Jan 06
    Location
    DPRK, Demokratik People's Republik of Kalifornia
    Posts
    23,772
    Quote Originally Posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
    Nope. China offered. The Kims declined.

    In a roundabout way. Soviet forces in North Korea were protected by the Strategic Rocket Forces.
    Ah, gotcha.
    "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

  6. #36
    Contributor DarthSiddius's Avatar
    Join Date
    23 Nov 11
    Location
    Burlington, ON
    Posts
    412

    Post Meanwhile...

    North Korea faked missile test footage: U.S. experts

    Footage released last week by North Korea purporting to show the firing of a submarine-launched ballistic missile (SLBM) appears to be fake, according to studies by U.S. experts.

    In defiance of a U.N. ban, North Korea has said it has ballistic missile technology which would allow it to launch a nuclear warhead from a submarine, though analysis of North Korean state media images casts doubt on the claim.

    North Korea released the submarine launch footage after it separately conducted a fourth nuclear weapons test last Wednesday.

    North Korean state television aired footage on Friday of the submarine test said to have taken place in December. Unlike a previous SLBM test in May, it was not announced at the time.

    South Korea's military said on Saturday North Korea appeared to have modified the video and edited it with Scud missile footage from 2014 although an official told Reuters the ejection technology might have improved since the May test.

    An analysis by the California-based James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies (CNS) shows two frames of video from state media where flames engulf the missile and small parts of its body break away.

    "The rocket ejected, began to light, and then failed catastrophically," Melissa Hanham, a senior research associate at the Middlebury Institute's CNS, said in an email. "North Korea used heavy video editing to cover over this fact."

    Hanham said North Korea state media used different camera angles and editing to make it appear the launch was several continuous launches, when in fact it was a single event.

    North Korean propagandists used rudimentary editing techniques to crop and flip old video footage of an earlier SLBM test and Scud missile launch, the CNS study showed.

    In an analysis on the 38 North monitoring website, John Schilling, an aerospace engineer who is a specialist in satellite and launch vehicle propulsion systems, said it appeared from the video that the launch was conducted from a submerged barge rather than a submarine.

    "The failed launch, combined with testing from a barge shows that North Korea still has a long way to go to develop this system," he said. "An initial operational capability of a North Korean ballistic-missile submarine is not expected before 2020."

    North Korea's claim that its most recent nuclear test was of a more advanced and powerful hydrogen bomb drew skepticism from the U.S. government and experts. It remains unclear if North Korea has developed a nuclear device small enough to mount on a missile.

  7. #37
    Senior Contributor Monash's Avatar
    Join Date
    01 Mar 10
    Location
    Sydney
    Posts
    1,418
    So making the (very) big assumption they now have a workable bomb whats the delivery system UPS?

  8. #38

    Military Professional
    Military Professional S2's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 06
    Location
    Portland, Oregon
    Posts
    10,755
    "The failed launch, combined with testing from a barge shows that North Korea still has a long way to go to develop this system," he said. "An initial operational capability of a North Korean ballistic-missile submarine is not expected before 2020."

    Is anybody else disturbed by the incompatibility of these comments with one another? How can "...a long way to go..." reconcile with "...before 2020..."?

    This expert might easily have said,

    "We expect a N. Korean SLBM IOC as early as 2020."

    That would be a very serious concern.
    "This aggression will not stand, man!" Jeff Lebowski
    "The only true currency in this bankrupt world is what you share with someone else when you're uncool." Lester Bangs

  9. #39
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    13 Nov 07
    Posts
    3,466
    Quote Originally Posted by S2 View Post
    "The failed launch, combined with testing from a barge shows that North Korea still has a long way to go to develop this system," he said. "An initial operational capability of a North Korean ballistic-missile submarine is not expected before 2020."

    Is anybody else disturbed by the incompatibility of these comments with one another? How can "...a long way to go..." reconcile with "...before 2020..."?

    This expert might easily have said,

    "We expect a N. Korean SLBM IOC as early as 2020."

    That would be a very serious concern.
    I think a long way to go has been modified in the internet age. It now means well after the next cat meme or certainly after the next election cycle.

  10. #40
    Defense ProfessionalSenior Contributor tbm3fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    01 Nov 09
    Location
    San Francisco Bay Area
    Posts
    2,883
    Another high profile execution in North Korea, the Army Chief of Staff. I would assume if is for something other than what the terse report says?

    (CNN)General Ri Yong-gil, chief of the North Korean Army's general staff has been executed for "factionalism, misuse of authority and corruption," a South Korean government official tells CNN.

    The official would not elaborate on any other details, including when the execution took place.

    Developing story - more to come
    http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/10/asia/n...ted/index.html

  11. #41
    Senior Contributor SteveDaPirate's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Aug 13
    Location
    Kansas City, United States
    Posts
    1,189
    North Korea 'has miniature nuclear warhead', says Kim Jong-un

    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-35760797

  12. #42
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    13 Nov 07
    Posts
    3,466
    So here's a question, what if the US killed Kim Jong Un. Decapitation strike, shot down his airplane, Hellfire from a drone, what ever. Kills him and just him. What happens next?

  13. #43
    Senior Contributor Doktor's Avatar
    Join Date
    25 Aug 08
    Location
    Skopje, Macedonia
    Posts
    13,584
    Why would US do it?
    No such thing as a good tax - Churchill

    To make mistakes is human. To blame someone else for your mistake, is strategic.

  14. #44
    Senior Contributor SteveDaPirate's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Aug 13
    Location
    Kansas City, United States
    Posts
    1,189
    Quote Originally Posted by citanon View Post
    So here's a question, what if the US killed Kim Jong Un. Decapitation strike, shot down his airplane, Hellfire from a drone, what ever. Kills him and just him. What happens next?
    Any hope of future talks or diplomatic progress would die with Kim Jong Un, and either Kim Jong Chul or Kim Jong Nam take over the NK dynasty to continue business as usual.

  15. #45
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    13 Nov 07
    Posts
    3,466
    Quote Originally Posted by SteveDaPirate View Post
    Any hope of future talks or diplomatic progress would die with Kim Jong Un, and either Kim Jong Chul or Kim Jong Nam take over the NK dynasty to continue business as usual.
    Steve you are not ruthless enough in your reasoning, as a result you got the answer backwards.

    The chief danger from successfully killing Kim is a collapse of the regime. if the regime does not collapse the results will be largely positive.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 17 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 17 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. North Korea Suspected of Planning Rocket Test
    By xinhui in forum East Asia and the Pacific
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 19 Dec 12,, 08:25
  2. North Korea seen readying for new nuclear test
    By xrough in forum East Asia and the Pacific
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 07 May 09,, 10:36
  3. North Korea Cancels Test Launch.
    By Maxor in forum Military Aviation
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 05 Apr 09,, 16:17
  4. North Korea claims nuclear test
    By Anoop C in forum East Asia and the Pacific
    Replies: 289
    Last Post: 13 Mar 08,, 05:20
  5. North Korea test-fires 7th missile
    By ARH Gabriel in forum Military Aviation
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 06 Jul 06,, 18:40

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •