North Korea ready to launch nuclear missiles at any time - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Proj3ct_ZeRo;47367111]"North Korea ready to blow itself up at any time"[/QUOTE] Kim has been at that for years, the process is just very slow and involves brainwashing and malnourishment.

[QUOTE=isreal?;47365461]I don't know weather or not you're right or wrong, but you aren't very qualified to state such things as fact are you.[/QUOTE] I am not sure about you, but I am rather willing to trust someone who can give details and evidence to support their reasoning rather than someone who just whines and does not know the difference between "weather" and "whether." Your "logic" of just doubting and mistrusting everyone and everything except their own uneducated opinions is the same "logic" used by climate change deniers and the anti-vaccination movement and have caused nothing but problems for the rest of us. Please stop, or if you wish to maintain this point of view, at least go do some research first so you have something to back up what you are saying.

[QUOTE=da space core;47367606]I am not sure about you, but I am rather willing to trust someone who can give details and evidence to support their reasoning rather than someone who just whines and does not know the difference between "weather" and "whether." Your "logic" of just doubting and mistrusting everyone and everything except their own uneducated opinions is the same "logic" used by climate change deniers and the anti-vaccination movement and have caused nothing but problems for the rest of us. Please stop, or if you wish to maintain this point of view, at least go do some research first so you have something to back up what you are saying.[/QUOTE] North Korea is a prosperous state and a bastion of hope in this world which is full of western poverty. Just listen to me.

[img]http://i.imgur.com/sTA859Ll.png[/img] If they wanted to hit a city like San Francisco, their ICBM would have to travel nearly 6,000 mi. the longest ranged ICBM was the R-36M by Russia (9,000 mi.), but lets be honest here, North Korea doesn't have the nuclear power as Russia. They'd end up hitting the Pacific Ocean (or Hawaii, if that's what they're going for)

[QUOTE=isreal?;47367615]North Korea is a prosperous state and a bastion of hope in this world which is full of western poverty. Just listen to me.[/QUOTE] Are you rayhalo 2.0? (was that his name?)

[QUOTE=Evi.tf;47366872]you people aren't gonna be laughing when the missile actually hits the usa[/QUOTE] I mean

[QUOTE=Evi.tf;47366872]you people aren't gonna be laughing when the missile actually hits the usa[/QUOTE] And then, a missile actually hits the USA. [sp]but it doesn't explode[/sp]

[QUOTE=Evi.tf;47366872]you people aren't gonna be laughing when the missile actually hits the usa[/QUOTE] Actually we would Because when NK launches that nuke of their's at us, implying that it could even reach the coast, it would intercepted and destroyed before it ever reached it's target. Then NATO would retaliate at least 3 fold and North Korea would cease to exist.

[QUOTE=Wint3r;47367703][img]http://i.imgur.com/sTA859Ll.png[/img] If they wanted to hit a city like San Francisco, their ICBM would have to travel nearly 6,000 mi. the longest ranged ICBM was the R-36M by Russia (9,000 mi.), but lets be honest here, North Korea doesn't have the nuclear power as Russia. They'd end up hitting the Pacific Ocean (or Hawaii, if that's what they're going for)[/QUOTE] oh god it's hm2 in real life

[QUOTE=ksenior;47367211]Ballistic missile defense is actually really difficult.[/QUOTE] Our ABM systems are built for mirved ICBMs with radar decoys and chafe countermeasures...NK is a little behind on this arms race

The problem is if everyone sits on their hands long enough then eventually they will actually have the ability to do what they claim to now.

[QUOTE=DaMastez;47368132]The problem is if everyone sits on their hands long enough then eventually they will actually have the ability to do what they claim to now.[/QUOTE] Well they probably can launch a 1-5 kiloton warhead at what they think is California, what's been reported doesn't say much on how successful the war on Atlantis has been going, but those tests would most likely be developing guidance systems, but there's a huge difference between flying a missile a few miles to the sea and flying one 6000 miles to California and hitting anything of strategic or populated areas. A 1-5 kiloton bomb is about the size of the Davey crocket and is like the lower limit on nuclear weaponry but the affects of a bomb that small would be very minimal and very dependant on how it hits (airburst is preferable but they've not tested it) and exactly where it hits, which again is very very easy to screw up

[QUOTE=Proj3ct_ZeRo;47367111]"North Korea ready to blow itself up at any time"[/QUOTE] -South Korea suddenly becomes an island-

It's always funny to see North Korea be so god damn ass backwards and late to everything that they still haven't understood nuclear threat has basically been dealt with thirty years ago.

[QUOTE=Sableye;47368076]Our ABM systems are built for mirved ICBMs with radar decoys and chafe countermeasures...NK is a little behind on this arms race[/QUOTE] North Korea's missiles are so outdated that they are not even considered a threat by the US' defense systems.

[QUOTE=Sam Za Nemesis;47368433][url]http://global.thermonuclearwar.org/[/url] says otherwise[/QUOTE] i got on this and somebody spelled out "god not real" with nukes

[QUOTE=Sableye;47368076]Our ABM systems are built for mirved ICBMs with radar decoys and chafe countermeasures...NK is a little behind on this arms race[/QUOTE] I don't get it, it would just be easier for them to smuggle a nuke into the US then to build an ICBM that can hit it. Why do they need the 30 minute strike capability anyway, when they set one off in someones backyard they're toast either way.

[QUOTE=isreal?;47365461]I don't know weather[/QUOTE] Let me help you then: [url]http://www.accuweather.com/[/url] [editline]21st March 2015[/editline] [QUOTE=DaMastez;47368132]The problem is if everyone sits on their hands long enough then eventually they will actually have the ability to do what they claim to now.[/QUOTE] By then the merfolk from the Sea of Japan will have turned the tide of the war, I'm sure we don't have much to worry about.

This just in: The Ocean is [I]mildly[/I] perturbed.

[QUOTE=theevilldeadII;47365413]stop dick waving kimmy.[/QUOTE] To dickwave you have to have a dick. And what I mean by that is that they don't actually have a nuke. [editline]a[/editline] Or at least one that'll do anything to anyone ever

[QUOTE=isreal?;47365461]I don't know weather or not you're right or wrong, but you aren't very qualified to state such things as fact are you.[/QUOTE] what the fuck kind of statement is this? Just denying the truth of what he is saying because you don't [I]think[/I] he is qualified? This is how an ICBM works, and you're a dumbass if you think his post isn't worth anything because he isn't "very qualified" also it's fucking "whether"

[QUOTE=ultra_bright;47371679]I don't get it, it would just be easier for them to smuggle a nuke into the US then to build an ICBM that can hit it. Why do they need the 30 minute strike capability anyway, when they set one off in someones backyard they're toast either way.[/QUOTE] Pretty much what I've always assumed a north Korean first strike would be, smuggle a nuke on a fishing boat up to a Japanese port and let it off, the damage would be severe and it would be much harder to detect or even worse use their trade zone with south Korea to smuggle a bomb through as cargo, either way it virtually eliminates the need for a delivery system, they just have to make sure it gets to the target, though since 9-11 the US has beefed up against such an attack, I'd assume south Korea and Japan have similar radiation sensors in place at ports to detect it in a container

[QUOTE=Sableye;47365537]the bulk of the US's nuclear weapons programs for the last 40 years have been miniturizing the warhead, electronics, re-entry vehicle research, and improving guidance systems, the rocket tech has pretty much remained static since the late 1960s with the introduction of the minute man systems, the later itterations are essentially the same in terms of rocket tech, 2 solid rocket boosters, and essentially all the ICBM weilding countries have gone that route. in terms of my actual knowledge of the NK nuclear program, yes you're right, but the first US nuclear weapons were the size of semi-trailers, and that was with the enourmous resources we have, nobody has seen a NK device, they've been smart to keep the tests underground but the released info has shown that either the device is really small, or they are really bad at nuclear weapons with calculated yeilds in only about a dozen kilotons. further, nothing they've shot off appears capable of carrying a warhead of any sufficient size except for their satellite launch vehicle which would require extensive heat transfer modeling as well as hypersonic testing to design a sufficient re-entry vehicle to even let the warhead survive launch and re-entry we built enourmous facilities dedicated to this, with wind tunnels that took entire power generation capacities of small cities, how can a country that can barely turn on its lights even be able of that? i'm in engineering and while i don't fully know the problems, i know enough to understand the magnitude of some of the problems such as re-entry vehicles and the fluid dynamic work that has to be done[/QUOTE] They actually have soviet missiles which can be used as nuclear carriers. The problem isn't the vehicle or guidance itself, but the payload. That's where people are assuming NK is still having the biggest issues in terms of feasibility.