Quote:
Originally Posted by ironpony
But I find it hard to believe that North Korea, would even be able to invent nuclear weapons, and if they did, they may use them as a defense, but I certainly cannot see them wanting to draw first blood with them, because they wouldn't win, so what would be the point?
|
You don't know how wrong you are.
North Korea does have nuclear weapons. North Korea has admitted that, and we have data on their test-shots.
Not only has North Korea successfully tested a fission device, they have tested a fission-fusion device, but the success of that test is debatable. I maintain it was a small yield fission-fusion that was successful, but others disagree.
When your only fuel is Uranium-235, and that is the case for Pakistan and would be the case for Iran, you're limited to a maximum yield of 60 kt.
However, there is no means of delivering such a device, because it's size and weight are too great for any existing missile system. The only aircraft that could carry it is the US B-52G/H. The US B-2 could not carry it, and I seriously doubt a B-1 could carry it either, not because of the weight, but because of the way their bomb-bays are designed.
Pakistan used to have B-57Gs, but they took them out of service in the 1980s. Pakistan has French-made Mirage that could carry a 20 kt warhead. Their US F-16s could not, because those are export models, and they don't have the hard-point or conduit system necessary.
Pakistan has maybe four or five 20 kt gravity bomb warheads, and the rest are 0.01 kt to 2 kt warheads primarily for tube artillery -- maximum range about 35-37 miles, and short-range missiles -- maximum range about 80-120 miles -- and that's it.
Using Plutonium as a fuel, and Pakistan and Iran don't have Plutonium, the maximum yield is 200 kt, but such a device cannot be delivered.
The French did have a 140 kt Plutonium gravity bomb to be delivered by the Entendard and Super Entendard bombers, but those were taken out of service in the 1970s. Neither the US, Britain or Russia ever designed Plutonium weapons that large.
India has about two dozen 20 kt to 40 kt warheads that can be delivered by aircraft or intermediate range missiles, and smaller yield warheads for short range missiles and tube artillery. India did attempt a test of a fission-fusion device, but failed and never pursued it further.
In a nuclear war between Pakistan and India, it's highly unlikely Pakistan's aircraft would penetrate Indian air defenses, while India could level Pakistan easily.
Which brings us to North Korea.
North Korea has Plutonium, and quite a bit, and fission devices would certainly be for defense, but North Korea is pursuing high yield offensive warheads.
In the debate over North Korea's fission-fusion test, I believe North Korea was testing a design and not an actual deployable weapons system.
Once you know your design works, you can use it for weapons with yields of 100 kt, 400 kt, 750 kt, 1 megaton or 5 megatons.
It doesn't matter.
And, contrary to what you believe, North Korea would survive a nuclear attack, while the US would not.
When North Korea launches, most of their government will be in a secure facility impervious to nuclear attack, and a large part of their population will be moving to safe places.
Best case scenario, maybe you kill 1 Million North Koreans and relegate the country from 3rd World Status to 4th World Status.
But, you, you would not survive.
Three well-placed 450 kt warheads detonated at 85 miles above the Earth's surface would generate an electromagnetic pulse that would destroy your electrical grid for a century or more, render most of your micro-chip electronics useless, and result in the death of 250 Million Americans within 90 days and another 50 Million over the next 90 days.
Not one American will die from blast or heat effect, or radiation or fallout (there wouldn't be any fallout).
They'll die of starvation, dehydration, malnutrition, disease, illness, violence and by their own hand.
No one can help you.
The entire world working together don't have enough cargo aircraft to feed you.
Best case scenario, you might be able to feed 3 Million to 10 Million people for a short period.
What about the other 300 Million? They die.
Once a cargo aircraft lands in the US, it can never leave, because you have no way to refuel it. Even if you rigged a siphon system to get aviation fuel out of the tanks, you can't get it to the aircraft. You might be able to taxi a cargo aircraft to a fuel tank, but you could only refuel one at a time, it would take a very long time, and you risk damage to the aircraft landing gear or wings.
You can imagine if starving people knew food was being delivered to JFK, or La Guardia or Newark, there'd be swarms of people. You'd need troops to protect the aircraft, the pilots, and ensure food and medical supplies were delivered in an orderly fashion, and that means you need aircraft to support the troops, which means fewer aircraft delivering food.
As soon as the tanks are dry, game over. No more food. Aircraft could deliver food for 3-5 days before you ran out of fuel.
Ships won't work, either. All of your ports are already filled with ships, so there's no place to dock. Even if a few slips were available, it doesn't matter, because the cranes aren't working and you have no way to off-load the cargo from the ships.
None of that matters, because ships run on diesel oil, and there's no way to refuel a ported ship.
An attack in October would be devastating. Crops have been harvested, so you can't raid fields for food. Grocery stores will have been totally looted in the first 3-5 days, and after that it's Starvation Time.
Some nutters think they're going to hunt. Yeah, right, 1,000 hunters in 1 square mile hunting a single deer.
If 10 hunters walk away alive, it'll be a good day.
It'll be a long Winter. People who don't starve to death will freeze to death. It's kind of hard to pick fire-wood when you've only eaten twice in the last 3 weeks.
There's always cannibalism.
So, there is a threat, it's very real, and you should be afraid.