PowerSwitch Main Page
PowerSwitch
The UK's Peak Oil Discussion Forum & Community
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Korea watch
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    PowerSwitch Forum Index -> General Discussion
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
adam2
Site Admin


Joined: 02 Jul 2007
Posts: 5991
Location: North Somerset

PostPosted: Sat Aug 12, 2017 9:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Agree, but I still hope that if the USA are attacked, even with a nuke, that they will confine their response to only conventional weapons.

Use of even a few small tactical nukes is crossing a very dangerous line indeed.
"Doing a Dresden" on NK is IMHO far preferable to even the most limited nuclear retaliation, even if the loss of life is similar.
_________________
"Installers and owners of emergency diesels must assume that they will have to run for a week or more"
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
clv101
Site Admin


Joined: 24 Nov 2005
Posts: 7532

PostPosted: Sat Aug 12, 2017 10:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

adam2 wrote:
Use of even a few small tactical nukes is crossing a very dangerous line indeed.

Indeed, but I expect many in the military don't think that line is very sensible and would like the 100 ton weapons to be on the table in a way that 1 megaton weapons aren't.
_________________
PowerSwitch on Facebook | The Oil Drum | Twitter | Blog
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
vtsnowedin



Joined: 07 Jan 2011
Posts: 4179
Location: New England ,Chelsea Vermont

PostPosted: Sun Aug 13, 2017 3:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

The idea that we have a low yield nuclear devise that we could use without killing a large number of the civilian population while pressing home the point that some other countries program is a waste of time and money is nice to think about but as far as we civilians know is not in existence.
If they had one would they not have already have used it several times.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
clv101
Site Admin


Joined: 24 Nov 2005
Posts: 7532

PostPosted: Sun Aug 13, 2017 8:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

See this article from some 18 months ago. I think it's perfectly plausible that the US has a substantially sub-kiloton device ready and that some would like an opportunity to 'test' it.

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/12/science/as-us-modernizes-nuclear-weapons-smaller-leaves-some-uneasy.html
_________________
PowerSwitch on Facebook | The Oil Drum | Twitter | Blog
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
vtsnowedin



Joined: 07 Jan 2011
Posts: 4179
Location: New England ,Chelsea Vermont

PostPosted: Sun Aug 13, 2017 3:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

clv101 wrote:
See this article from some 18 months ago. I think it's perfectly plausible that the US has a substantially sub-kiloton device ready and that some would like an opportunity to 'test' it.

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/12/science/as-us-modernizes-nuclear-weapons-smaller-leaves-some-uneasy.html

Oh weapons of that size range certainly exist, the problem is how to use one without risking escalation.
There was a joke back during the Korean war.
"The government has announced that they have developed a nuclear hand grenade. It blows a hole 150 feet wide and seventy feet deep. The average GI can throw it fifty feet".
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
clv101
Site Admin


Joined: 24 Nov 2005
Posts: 7532

PostPosted: Sun Aug 13, 2017 9:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

The escalation risk was, historically, why tactical weapons were seen as so dangerous and so lumped in with strategic. But I think that's out of date, cold war thinking. I don't see much escalation risk associated with their use against North Korea.

I'm not advocating their use, I'm just saying I wouldn't be surprised if a small number of sub-kiloton nuclear weapons were used in the next 12 months.
_________________
PowerSwitch on Facebook | The Oil Drum | Twitter | Blog
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
vtsnowedin



Joined: 07 Jan 2011
Posts: 4179
Location: New England ,Chelsea Vermont

PostPosted: Mon Aug 14, 2017 1:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

clv101 wrote:
I'm just saying I wouldn't be surprised if a small number of sub-kiloton nuclear weapons were used in the next 12 months.

I must sadly and nervously agree with you on that.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
raspberry-blower



Joined: 14 Mar 2009
Posts: 1385

PostPosted: Tue Aug 15, 2017 11:44 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Moon of Alabama: Hyping North Korean Threat to Relaunch Star Wars?

Quote:
The Reagan wannabe currently ruling in the White House may soon revive Reagan's Strategic Defense Initiative, aka "Star Wars", which was first launched in 1984. SDI was the expensive but unrealistic dream of lasers in space and other such gimmicks. Within the SDI the U.S. military threw out hundreds of billions for a Global Ballistic Missile Defense which supposedly would defend the continental U.S. from any incoming intercontinental missile. The program was buried in the early 1990s. One son of Star Wars survived. It is the National Missile Defense with 40 interceptors in Alaska and California. It has never worked well and likely never will. If NMD would function as promised there would be no reason to fear any North Korean ICBMs. Missile defense is largely a fraud to transfers billions of dollars from U.S. taxpayers to various weapon producing conglomerates.

I expect that the North Korean "threat" will soon be used to launch "SDI - The Sequel", another attempt to militarize space with billions thrown into futuristic but useless "defense" projects. It will soothe the Pentagon's grief over the success North Korea had despite decades of U.S. attempts to subjugate that state.


The threat posed to the Lower 48 has been hyped up well beyond any semblance of reality.

A lot of this bluster has been caused by Trump's bluff being called earlier this year when he stated that the USS Carl Vinson was steaming to the Korean peninsula when, in fact, it was actually in Indonesian waters.

The threat of North Korean missile tests landing off the coast of Guam is another calling of the US bluff. That is all.

The Military Industrial Complex wants some more dosh to make more nice shiny missile systems that give the false illusion that US service personnel can be kept safe in theatres of "operations"
_________________
A common mistake that people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools - Douglas Adams.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
emordnilap



Joined: 05 Sep 2007
Posts: 13676
Location: way out west

PostPosted: Wed Aug 16, 2017 9:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

"Missile defense is largely a fraud to transfers billions of dollars from U.S. taxpayers to various weapon producing conglomerates."

And the rest of the world. And planned obsolescence is their corporate ethos. Plus any weaponry actually used needs to be replaced.

Thus killing = money printing.

I'd like to see all manufacturers of weaponry of any sort taxed at least 85% of gross profits, for a start.
_________________
The human appears to have no idea what its ideal diet should be; has self-inflicted diet-related diseases; causes extensive environmental destruction through basic food production & creates pathogenic infestations that widely infect its food supply.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    PowerSwitch Forum Index -> General Discussion All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5
Page 5 of 5

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group