North Korea's nuclear, missile programs 'serious threat' to security: Pentagon chief

[bu2]

Originally Posted by Frank DeForrest

Should we nuke them?

If they fly one over Hawaii, it will be time to take out their reactor and their ICBM site.
Hopefully we have weapons other than nukes that can do that.

They've already done that to Japan.

[Mircea]

Originally Posted by Finn_Jarber

Thanks Trump

This is what happens when you run a "hide in basement" foreign policy.


North Korea's nuclear, missile programs 'serious threat' to security: Pentagon chief

That's laughable sky is falling down nonsense.

Do you understand that a ballistic missile without a warhead is no threat?

Perhaps you believe that when one builds a ballistic missile, the Nuclear Angels, clad in shimmering samite, descend from the Heavens and mount a nuclear warhead on the missile.

North Korea ran the two nuclear reactors that Clinton gave them only enough to produce about 60 kg of Plutonium, assuming the North Koreans ran the reactors right and assuming their gaseous diffusion system was run with extraordinary precision and efficiency.

I won't even get into the obtuse idea that a Republican is responsible for cleaning up the mess a Democrat made.

I notice three things.

One, everyone is long on criticism, but short on solutions, two, no one seems to understand that it is the nuclear reactors that are the real threat, and three, no one seems to understand the situation.

So long as those two nuclear reactors that Clinton gave to the North Koreans exist, there will always be the threat that North Korea can produce Plutonium.

Clinton gave them the reactors to produce electricity, because North Korea has no oil or natural gas, practically no coal; the country cannot buy coal, oil or natural gas on the global market on credit because it's guaranteed they will default on their loans; and because the country is basically a large rock with no remarkable minerals or ores to trade and it produces nothing of value to trade on the global market for oil, coal or natural gas.

Winters in North Korea are particularly harsh and without electricity, North Koreans have no way of heating their homes without deforesting the entire country, which I'm sure the rest of the world would find appalling, especially the environmental nutters.

Now that we actually understand the problem, we can look at potential solutions.

1) Bribe Jung not to run the reactors. That is not really a solution, because there's no guarantee they won't take the money and run and it would mean bribing North Korea with US tax-payer money for the rest of this Century. You could try to get other States to share the pain so US tax-payers don't bear the brunt, but in the end, you will have only delayed the production of any nuclear weapons and not actually stopped it.

2) Bribe Jung to dismantle the reactors and guarantee him either the money to buy energy resources or provide energy resources to him in lieu of money. The problem with that is he won't do it and he's not gonna let foreigners into the country to do it, because there's no way to hide foreigners dismantling the reactors. From his perspective, and the perspective of any of his successors, he would appear weak in the eyes of his people since he is now totally dependent on foreign powers for energy and if the foreign powers cut him off, he's screwed and he knows that.

So, that's not gonna happen.

3) The Military Option: You could strike the reactors. Would that cause an environmental or ecological problem? That depends. If the reactors are not operating, then the ecological disaster would be confined to the immediately vicinity and nowhere else in North Korea or the world. But, if the reactors are operating, then it would be an ecological catastrophe. Think Fukipuki in Japan. Once the strike occurs, they won't be able to shut down the reactors and the cooling system will be damaged and it will meltdown and catch fire and burn just like Fukipuki.

4) The Other Military Option: Take out Jung. You could attempt that multi-laterally by taking it to the UN Security Council, but we all know China will veto it and that will be the end of that. You could then take your case to the Euro-States, because we all know that no one really gives a goddam what the governments of Central and South America, and Africa and most of Asia think. The problem with that is his successor is likely to be just as evil, if not worse, and they may initiate conflict with South Korea, in which case Americans should be prepared to watch American POWs paraded around.

5) The Other Other Military Option: Take out Jung and damage the infrastructure. The would require hitting command and control targets, communication targets, and all of the supply depots and logistics facilities.

Remember, this is Real Life, not a video game. A North Korean tank doesn't drive over a bright blue flower and get 10,000 points and a butt-load of fuel and ammo.

Destroy the fuel depots, take out a few key bridges and disrupt their logistics and their tanks and APCs can travel as far as they can on one take of diesel and then it really is game over.

That part is like a video game.

There is no diplomacy to be had with North Korea. Their takers, not givers. They don't yield, they don't make concessions, they don't compromise or anything else.

Yeah, I'm sure if the US agreed to withdraw politically and militarily from South Korea and sign a treaty not to intervene in any action in South Korea, I'm sure they'll be willing to make concessions or compromise.

Aside from that, nothing will happen very slowly.

The North Koreans only had 60 kg of weapons grade Plutonium at most.

They used at least 5 kg in the first test-shot, and 15 kg each in the next two test shots, so they only have about 25 kg left.

In theory, they could make two 12 kt fission triggers out of that, which would be enough fuse Hydrogen into Helium and get two warheads in the 400-450 kt range, but that's it.