What happens if Trump nukes North Korea?

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

Whatever about instigating a war, nuking a country is so fcuked up. Even using low yield strategic nuclear warheads, it's still very risky.

grahambo wrote: »

The ICBM in question is the Hwasong-14, It is carried on Transporter erector launcher vehicle.

There are no missile pads or silos.

If the Americans can only hit 3 Tanks in a 10 day bombing campaign over Kosovo, what chance have they at hitting the 30 to 50 of these Launchers all in one go?

0 is the answer, and that's just the Hwasong-14, NK have 100's of other short and medium range missiles capable of hitting targets such as Japan, South Korea, etc.

Bare in mind also that Hwasong-14 is capable of hitting a targets in Europe.

We DO NOT want Trump going in there causing trouble.

Kosovo was 20 years ago. That's a massive time frame where military technology is concerned.

Bob24

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

If they got nukes they will use them early.

What kind of nukes are you taking about. I've said it before and i will reapeat: exploding an artisanal nuclear bomb under the ground and building a smal one which can be loaded onto a ballistic missile and triggered at the appropriate time are 2 different things.

NK is very likely capable of doing the first thing, but extremely unlikely to be able to do the second.

Are Am Eye

howamidifferent wrote: »

Chinese radar?

Radar is no good against stealth fighters and bombers. F-22, B-2. They wont be playing hide and seek either the fifty trucks are being well watched.

By the way koreas icbm capability is in its spluttering infancy ...the one in that youtube clip above is in test stages, theyve managed to fire one into the sea near japan. If it were to go across the atlantic it would be with a small payload ie not nuclear

weisses

What happens ??

steamsey

This podcast pretty much sums up why no one will attack North Korea

https://www.samharris.org/podcast/item/must-we-accept-a-nuclear-north-korea

ScumLord

grahambo wrote: »

Bingo!

Also have you ever heard how loud a plane travelling beyond the speed of sound is?
It's the one thing no stealth tech can hide.

I was watching a video on the SR 71 blackbird and they talked about the north koreans firing a missile at them. They missed, it wasn't so much that they couldn't see the plane, they couldn't track it effectively, they had to send updates to the missile on the planes position and heading and the plane was more or less gone by the time that update arrived. I'm assuming that was a while ago now, since the plane has been decommissioned and both sides have improved since but I still would expect that in most cases the US air force is pretty safe in N.Korean airspace. I know the Koreans have shot down a handful of planes but that's probably out of thousands of flyovers.

Gatling

grahambo wrote: »

Same way the "crippled" the Serbian army during the Kosovo war

Read this:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/liberation-of-kosovo-bomb-damage-how-fake-guns-and-painting-the-roads-fooled-nato-1101479.html

NATO way overestimated the damage they caused during the Kosovo war.
Serbs used mock ups and moved there air force via road around the country to hide/protect it.
Serbian Army is as strong as it ever was.

Your saying not to believe Nato while believing serbs in interviews .
Nato may have flown thousands of combat missions but again your taking the idea Nato carried out thousands of bombings which they didn't combat missions Vs bombs never match up .
Alot of times they don't drop munitions if there is a high risk to civillians .still counts as a mission

BrokenArrows

grahambo wrote: »

...

If they (The US or Coalition or whatever they are calling themselves these days) miss even one missile in a preemptive strike then we're all dead.

...

I think you're over estimating the power of a nuclear bomb.

The cold war days of insanely large ICBM missiles in their thousands are over.

In order to cause a "we're all dead" scenario you would need to be launching thousands of high powered ICBMs at the same time. Currently Russia, USA and China combined has less than 2000 and i doubt they are all ready to fire immediately.

And the nuclear winter scenario was vastly over estimated.

Worst case would be a slight drop in world temperatures and those directly impacted by a missile strike.

ScumLord

BrokenArrows wrote: »

Worst case would be a slight drop in world temperatures and those directly impacted by a missile strike.

So we'd reverse climate change and reduce the rampant human population?

Cheerful Spring

Bob24 wrote: »

What kind of nukes are you taking about. I've said it before and i will reapeat: exploding an artisanal nuclear bomb under the ground and building a smal one which can be loaded onto a ballistic missile and triggered at the appropriate time are 2 different things.

NK is very likely capable of doing the first thing, but extremely unlikely to be able to do the second.

Foreign security analysts as early as Feb 2017, said North Korea would not have a capable ICBM for another 2 to 3 years. I disagreed with this back then. Now they are saying six months? They are wrong again, NK is ready now.

The problem NK had was perfecting the rocket engine. It was untested and powered the ICBM. Now after testing numerous missiles they can now launch an ICBM successfully. Miniaturizing a nuke to fit into a missile is likely already accomplished. NK tested a nuke 11 years ago, they have already perfected nuclear technology on a grand scale.

Gatling

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Foreign security analysts as early as Feb 2017, said North Korea would not have a capable ICBM for another 2 to 3 years. I disagreed with this back then. Now they are saying six months? They are wrong again, NK is ready now.

The problem NK had was perfecting the rocket engine. It was untested and powered the ICBM. Now after testing numerous missiles they can now launch an ICBM successfully. Miniaturizing a nuke to fit into a missile is likely already accomplished. NK tested a nuke 11 years ago, they have already perfected nuclear technology on a grand scale.

They are been supplied by their friends in China ,,China made rockes and engines , china made launch vehicles ,
It's no surprise actually,

Everything is very loose guessing and conspiracy

asteroids over berlin

Jaysus boards appears to have an abundance of military experts!

ScumLord

asteroids over berlin wrote: »

Jaysus boards appears to have an abundance of military experts!

We've actually been the military advisors to N.Korean for the past five years, so everyone can relax those rockets aren't going to work.

Cheerful Spring

Trump on North Korea: 'It will be handled. We handle everything? What does that mean?

rossie1977

It means he has no idea what to do

Bob24

Cheerful Spring wrote: »

Foreign security analysts as early as Feb 2017, said North Korea would not have a capable ICBM for another 2 to 3 years. I disagreed with this back then. Now they are saying six months? They are wrong again, NK is ready now.

The problem NK had was perfecting the rocket engine. It was untested and powered the ICBM. Now after testing numerous missiles they can now launch an ICBM successfully. Miniaturizing a nuke to fit into a missile is likely already accomplished. NK tested a nuke 11 years ago, they have already perfected nuclear technology on a grand scale.

Yes ICBM are another thing. We were talking nuclear warheads here. What are you sources regarding the existence of miniaturised nukes?

Cheerful Spring

Bob24 wrote: »

Yes ICBM are another thing. We were talking nuclear warheads here. What are you sources regarding the existence of miniaturized nukes?

North Korea and Pakistan have been exchanging missile technology and scientists for 20+ years. Do we doubt Pakistan has a nuclear missile? Miniaturized nukes is a simple process when you already got the know how, North Korea has already tested nukes (2006) and has nuclear power stations.

Foreign analysts who are interviewed by CNN or Fox News can be clueless or be paid to downplay the threat. These same analysts should be ignored because they had timelines of 3 years for a successful ICBM launch only a few months ago. It's only when NK launched an ICBM for the first time ( never happened before) and it launched successfully did everyone say oh damn we better tell the American people some truth now! Second launch - success again, this missile is fired in lofted trajectory can hit Chicago maybe New York?

Tangatagamadda Chaddabinga Bonga Bungo

North Korea could be sorted out if China and Russia wanted it to be, they don't, so what happens in the end is not knowable.

Don't think South Korea (as a wealthy country) has the stomach for a war with the North. So they will avoid any war until it becomes a last resort.

North Korea has been preparing for all out total war for decades. It won't go down without a very bloody fight.

For all the superior technology and unlimited money the US army has at its disposal, they still can't defeat the Taliban (who are 'nothing more' than guys with guns hiding in caves).

Donald Trump

Fuck North Korea.


I'm going to nuke everybody

Bob24

Tangatagamadda Chaddabinga Bonga Bungo wrote: »

North Korea has been preparing for all out total war for decades. It won't go down without a very bloody fight.

For all the superior technology and unlimited money the US army has at its disposal, they still can't defeat the Taliban (who are 'nothing more' than guys with guns hiding in caves).

Very difficult to predict, but not sure Kim's soldiers will be follow him to the bitter end though. Even though they have been fed with propaganda, they seem more driven by fear of the regime that adhesion to its ideology, so if they start seing some cracks and feeling it is about to collapse, they might become unpredicatable.

branie2

Imagine if Trump was president in 1962.

Beta Ray Bill

Elijah Odd Adventurer wrote: »

Whatever about instigating a war, nuking a country is so fcuked up. Even using low yield strategic nuclear warheads, it's still very risky.

Kosovo was 20 years ago. That's a massive time frame where military technology is concerned.

True it was 18 years ago which is a considerable amount of time given Military tech improvements that have happened since then. (On both sides, not just the US)

However it's comparable because of the terrain in which a battle/war would be fought. Iraq/Afghanistan is not a good comparison because the terrain of those counties is different: Warm/Cold Desert. It's barren and open, it's difficult to hide large pieces of military equipment.

Serbia and North Korea are basically Temperate/Warm. That means lots of Vegetation (Forrest's etc) where it's easy to hide things.

Are Am Eye wrote: »

Radar is no good against stealth fighters and bombers. F-22, B-2. They wont be playing hide and seek either the fifty trucks are being well watched.

By the way koreas icbm capability is in its spluttering infancy ...the one in that youtube clip above is in test stages, theyve managed to fire one into the sea near japan. If it were to go across the atlantic it would be with a small payload ie not nuclear

Stealth reduces the Radar signature it doesn't make a plane invisible, very sensitive radar will pick them up. The F-117 is regarded as plane with the lowest RCS ever produced. The Serbs still managed to shoot one down in 1999 using an SA-3 at a range of 13kms.
They are difficult to detect but are not undetectable.
The B2 RCS is 10 times greater than the F-117, as for the F-22, know one knows. it's classified. It is acknowledged though that if it carries weapons on external hard points there is effectively no stealth.

And even that that, there have only been 180 F-22's built, the bulk of the work would need to be carried out by the F/A-18 which is 30 years old at this point.

I wouldn't say the ICBM program is in it's infancy, although I do agree it's not reached full potential in terms of what they are trying to achieve.

Gatling wrote: »

Your saying not to believe Nato while believing serbs in interviews .
Nato may have flown thousands of combat missions but again your taking the idea Nato carried out thousands of bombings which they didn't combat missions Vs bombs never match up .
Alot of times they don't drop munitions if there is a high risk to civillians .still counts as a mission

It was reported in Newsweek back in 2001 I think, I doubt I'd be able to find the article. They had access to the US air force report. I also remember it being reported on sky news.

I agree some of the combat missions might have been Recy mission but even at that, the ratio isn't good.

BrokenArrows wrote: »

I think you're over estimating the power of a nuclear bomb.

The cold war days of insanely large ICBM missiles in their thousands are over.

In order to cause a "we're all dead" scenario you would need to be launching thousands of high powered ICBMs at the same time. Currently Russia, USA and China combined has less than 2000 and i doubt they are all ready to fire immediately.

And the nuclear winter scenario was vastly over estimated.

Worst case would be a slight drop in world temperatures and those directly impacted by a missile strike.

It's what it would trigger that would kill us.

If the Korea uses a Nuke against the US, the US will have no choice but to retaliate using Nukes.
The problem is that China and Pakistan might also be a target, as they may have provided tech for NK for creating a Nuke.
If Pakistan is hit they'll Launch against India, who will in turn launch against China and Pakistan.
China in the mean time will have launched against India, and the US and probably Russia, who will in Turn launch against the EU and the US

IE we'll all be dead!

The above seems far fetched, but countries like the US, Russia and China will not go down without taking the other with them. Mutual assured destruction.

Think of Syria, but worldwide and about 10 times worse.

That's what's at stake here.

wes

grahambo wrote: »

The problem is that China and Pakistan might also be a target, as they may have provided tech for NK for creating a Nuke.
If Pakistan is hit they'll Launch against India, who will in turn launch against China and Pakistan.
China in the mean time will have launched against India, and the US and probably Russia, who will in Turn launch against the EU and the US

I remember reading that both India and Pakistan have 2 minutes (maybe less) to decide to retaliate in light of a nuclear strike launched by either of them. So if either thinks there about to be hit, they will likely fire, especially Pakistan as they lack a 2nd strike capability. Anyone firing off Nukes in the region, could accidentally cause an additional nuclear war, even if they weren't trying to attack Pakistan or India.

All it would take is a missile flying over either territory and bad communication, and we will see the death of something like 1/6th of the planets population, not to mention massive environmental damage, that will effect the entire planet for centuries.

blackcard

wes wrote: »

grahambo wrote: »

The problem is that China and Pakistan might also be a target, as they may have provided tech for NK for creating a Nuke.
If Pakistan is hit they'll Launch against India, who will in turn launch against China and Pakistan.
China in the mean time will have launched against India, and the US and probably Russia, who will in Turn launch against the EU and the US

I remember reading that both India and Pakistan have 2 minutes (maybe less) to decide to retaliate in light of a nuclear strike launched by either of them. So if either thinks there about to be hit, they will likely fire, especially Pakistan as they lack a 2nd strike capability. Anyone firing off Nukes in the region, could accidentally cause an additional nuclear war, even if they weren't trying to attack Pakistan or India.

All it would take is a missile flying over either territory and bad communication, and we will see the death of something like 1/6th of the planets population, not to mention massive environmental damage, that will effect the entire planet for centuries.

So what can be done to prevent Armageddon?

wes

blackcard wrote: »

So what can be done to prevent Armageddon?

Don't fire Nuclear weapons anywhere near India or Pakistan.
Probably shouldn't fire any near China while they are at it.

Gatling

wes wrote: »

Don't fire Nuclear weapons anywhere near India or Pakistan.
Probably shouldn't fire any near China while they are at it.

Funny thing kims latest missle launch was fairly close to the Chinese border ,
Wonder if that was by chance or tactical decision to Safe guard the launch

wes

Gatling wrote: »

Funny thing kims latest missle launch was fairly close to the Chinese border ,
Wonder if that was by chance or tactical decision to Safe guard the launch

Or Kim is really just that damn stupid.

Beta Ray Bill

blackcard wrote: »

So what can be done to prevent Armageddon?

Simples: Don't invade NK

Yeah, they'll get Nukes, but they realise everyone else has them too, so they can't use them.

Changes nothing in the grand scale of it all as China would have never tolerated an invasion of NK anyway.

ohnonotgmail

Gatling wrote: »

Funny thing kims latest missle launch was fairly close to the Chinese border ,
Wonder if that was by chance or tactical decision to Safe guard the launch

In fairness all of Kims missile launches start off pretty close to the chinese border

He is smart enough to send them in the opposite direction though.

realdanbreen

With all the military guys that are now walking the corridors of the white house surely the next logical move is a military coup in the US. I mean who is going to stop it if that is what these guys want to do?