Help support TMP


"North Korea Has Successfully Miniaturised A Nuclear..." Topic


18 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.


Back to the Utter Drivel Message Board

Back to the Ultramodern Warfare (2006-present) Message Board



691 hits since 8 Aug 2017
©1994-2017 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

Tango0108 Aug 2017 11:32 a.m. PST

… out

Tango0108 Aug 2017 11:34 a.m. PST

out

Tango0108 Aug 2017 11:34 a.m. PST

out

Personal logo Private Matter Supporting Member of TMP08 Aug 2017 11:44 a.m. PST

Why is it that whenever an American president's approval ratings go down, some outside threat suddenly becomes more prominent? (not taking sides, just an observation) I'm not saying North Korea isn't a threat but this same discussion (having nukes to mount on missiles) was brought up last year as well.

Tango0108 Aug 2017 11:47 a.m. PST

Because of the BUG… I repeat the original thread here….

North Korea has successfully produced a miniaturized nuclear warhead that can fit inside its missiles, crossing a key threshold on the path to becoming a full-fledged nuclear power, U.S. intelligence officials have concluded in a confidential assessment.

The new analysis completed last month by the Defense Intelligence Agency comes on the heels of another intelligence assessment that sharply raises the official estimate for the total number of bombs in the communist country's atomic arsenal. The U.S. calculated last month that up to 60 nuclear weapons are now controlled by North Korean leader Kim Jong Un. Some independent experts believe the number of bombs is much smaller.

The findings are likely to deepen concerns about an evolving North Korean military threat that appears to be advancing far more rapidly than many experts had predicted. U.S. officials last month concluded that Pyongyang is also outpacing expectations in its effort to build an intercontinental ballistic missile capable of striking cities on the American mainland…."
Main page
link


Amicalement
Armand

VCarter Supporting Member of TMP08 Aug 2017 11:48 a.m. PST

Out as well.

bsrlee08 Aug 2017 12:29 p.m. PST

Unfortunately, it doesn't matter much if they really work, a dud nuclear warhead is just about as much an environmental disaster as one that does go off, just less blast & fire damage, but its still going to mess things up for several millennia wherever it lands.

Tango0108 Aug 2017 12:45 p.m. PST

Japan Warns North Korea Nuclear Threat Has Entered ‘New Stage'

link

Delaying Tactics: New Sanctions, Still No Strategy

link


Amicalement
Armand

Personal logo piper909 Supporting Member of TMP08 Aug 2017 12:59 p.m. PST

The NKs want a deterrent and negotiating leverage but the US may not accept this fait accompli and use this as an excuse for a sneak attack instead.

gamershs08 Aug 2017 2:21 p.m. PST

Are they miniaturized strategic nuclear weapons or tactical nuclear weapons. There is a difference.

Gear Pilot Supporting Member of TMP08 Aug 2017 3:24 p.m. PST

It doesn't make much of a difference to the people on the receiving end.

Lion in the Stars08 Aug 2017 8:23 p.m. PST

Just a reminder that 20kilotons will utterly annihilate a city, blast radius is about 3km.

Then there's the chances of a Nork Nuke actually hitting anything. Last test broke up on re-entry, and the best range the Norks have right now is to hit Guam or Adak, Alaska.

But I think there's only a couple dozen targets to hit to completely decapitate the North Korean Command and Control system. (Pyongyang, all the Kim Dynasty estates, a few others) That could be done with a very limited launch from somewhere in the middle of the Pacific.

Personal logo Cacique Caribe Supporting Member of TMP08 Aug 2017 8:32 p.m. PST

I doubt Lil Kim's missile guidance systems would get anywhere near Guam.

link

But one of his subs could get to within a kilometer or two of the island and self detonate.

Dan

Lion in the Stars08 Aug 2017 10:01 p.m. PST

Nuclear reactors don't have a chance of nuclear detonation, despite what Whollyweird would like you to believe.

Personal logo jdginaz Supporting Member of TMP08 Aug 2017 11:14 p.m. PST

BS, they haven't even had a truly successful test yet. Just slightly bigger fizzles each time.

gamershs08 Aug 2017 11:30 p.m. PST

Actually yield does matter. Try this site:
nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap

Try 5kt< then try 35kt>

Personal logo etotheipi Sponsoring Member of TMP09 Aug 2017 9:43 a.m. PST

mess things up for several millennia wherever it lands.
picture

picture

Personal logo Cacique Caribe Supporting Member of TMP09 Aug 2017 3:18 p.m. PST

Lion: "Nuclear reactors don't have a chance of nuclear detonation"

Lol. I didn't say the sub's reactor.

Dan

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.