*Mushroom Cloud seen in N. Korea**

[wolfwood_is_here]

on the tac-nuke point, the "daisy cutter" is kinda-sorta like a low-yield nuke that has been "cleaned" to limit fallout to a very very small amount. It has a high output for the blast, yet does not leave any bad stuff. They used them in Afghanistan. If you have ever seen the movie Outbreak, I think that they were using daisy-cutter like bombs.


The thing I would be worried about is not the explosion, becuase you can make big boom, but if you survive in a blast shelter, you "could" be ok. I would be more afraid of "dirty" nukes, the ones that don't exactly make the biggest bang, but are designed to cause as much fallout as possible. Those are the kinds that shower people with hundreds of rads and give them cancer, and cause slow and paintful deaths (unless you live in oregon where you can get your medicinal marijuana).


I also think that Kim Dong Sung (the leader of NK, don't know if I spelled his name correctly) is smarter than people think he is. He is just really cruel, like Saddam was, only you don't hear much about NK.


These are interesting times we live in, and I am gonna do my part if I am ever "called" to do so. Until then, I will try to enjoy life and paintball and keep myself humble by remembering that there are people out there who aren't as blessed as me, and that they need our prayers.

Keep fighting the good fight!

[rkjunior303]

We used Daisy cutters in afghanistan. They are also used to clear makeshift helipads in the jungle, during vietnam. We also used the 2nd generation Daisy Cutter, too.> The MOAB. "Mother of All Bombs"

[WingMan13]

Nope, it wasn't nuclear!

[Eatem Alive]

These are interesting times we live in, and I am gonna do my part if I am ever "called" to do so. Until then, I will try to enjoy life and paintball and keep myself humble by remembering that there are people out there who aren't as blessed as me, and that they need our prayers.

Keep fighting the good fight!

exactly!

btw, that mushroom cloud looks...dirty?

[-Carnifex-]

It would be just a tad tougher to stage the invasion of North Korea than that of Iraq or Afghanistan. Military-wise they are a larger force with better training and equipment when compared to Iraq and Afghanistan. Ontop of that, in the event of an invasion their draft would make anything the United States has done look like a joke, this would force us to draft just about every able bodied American 18-22 to match there force. Ontop of that if they do indeed have working nuclear weapons I doubt they would be afraid to use them. American casulties would be in the hundreds of thousands if not millions.

So we only go after lesser threats?

[Mister Sinister]

Neither the Daisy Cutter or the MOAB are nuclear. The daisy cuttery is filled with a mixture of ammonium nitrate and powdered aluminum technically called GSX. MOAB used a tritonal explosive. I think these are being confused with the RNEP(Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator) which is a low yield nuke replacement for the bunker buster. These have not gone operational. They are still controversial as to how "dirty" they are. It isnt so much that they have been cleaned (the warhead they use was developed in 1966 long before that was a concern) Its that they a desingned to detonate far below the surface and seal the fallout underground with the heat from the blast.

I think Cphillip has it right on what the situation is and will be with North Korea.

[temps]

Yet another reason we should have been focusing our efforts on real threats as opposed to Iraq.

The profit margin was better in Iraq then in north Korea..

[Rooster]

"So we only go after lesser threats?"

Perhaps you can clear my clouded memory. What war did North Korea lose to the US in 1991? And what was the name of the dictator that surrendered to us to save his country and promised to allow UN weapons inspectors into his country as part of that agreement? And perhaps you could tell me the name of that North Korean dictator who renigged on his original surrender, thus nessestating a return to N. Korea to finish what should have been ended in 1991?

Perhaps you can tell me that.

[PyRo]

So we only go after lesser threats?

When did I say we only go after lesser threats? The fact of the matter is lesser threats are dealt with in a different manner than larger ones. What is your suggestion for military action in North Korea? Keep in mind that the use of nuclear weapons on our part isn’t feasible unless we are struck first.
Such use will result basically in other countries saying “screw you” when we tell them not to resort to nuclear weapons. Striking first would also lead to almost certain nuclear retaliation. Even if we strike their weapons they will almost certainly be able to get some in the air before our weapons reach them. Even using conventional weapons we are almost certain to kill thousands of civilians (blowing up a nuclear bomb = radiation, no?). In the eyes of the world and many Americans that is simply unacceptable.
So now we are reduced to a ground assault. Even so we still have to be worried about there nuclear arsenal. Assuming they choose not to use it there will still be hundreds of thousands of American casualties. How are you planning on rallying America and the world behind this invasion? The only way I can forsee that happening is North Korea striking first either with a nuclear weapon or something on the same scale or larger (probably larger) than 9-11.
Keep in mind that in an invasion you or your children stand a very good chance of being killed.

[cphilip]

They have no retalitory capablility. And yes we could wipe em out with one blow. All of them. We got special forces with "dial a yields" could be in and out with no trouble at all. No long range missles... no nothing. . There will be no warning for them if it comes. I am not saying it will come to that. Far from it. I think they will be starved out and conceed long before that. But the North Koreans sponsor no outside terrorism that we know of. Heck they don't trust anyone enough to do it. They are a threat manly to thier closest neighbors as they need food and raw goods. They are a threat mostly to themselves in most cases. They have so cut themselves off from the world they have no friends. Totaly different situation that mirrors nothing you want to compair to. I suspect not many would care if they did not exist. As sad and heartless as that comes across its pretty much true....

[PyRo]

They have no retalitory capablility..

Well I should have added that I was basing that on the assumption that they did have nuclear weapons and a delivery system.
I know they have no way of reaching American Soil. However If they do have nuclear warheads I think they could hit U.S. bases and other targets in South Korea no?
I wasn't refering to a terrorist event in that post either, I ment any attack of that scale.

[cphilip]

Well I should have added that I was basing that on the assumption that they did have nuclear weapons and a delivery system.
If they do have nuclear wawheads I think it is safe to say they could hit U.S. bases and other targets in South Korea no?

Oh they have some delivery. we know they might could come close to California. But we know its small and not retaliatory capable. And yea the neighbors is a issue. But more to them than to us. Russia, Japan, China and S Korea mainly are in reach. We think they have like maybe 6 warheads if that many. One could speculate as many deliveries but might not. But we can anticipate they would not survive a strike because no one would be there to push a button. More likely is the most threatened people around affected are China, Russia and Japan. And we can expect them to be MORE worried about it than we are.

As to US bases in Korea.... not much longer. One very good reason to speculate why we moving troops out of there is to take US troops out of harms way where we are not going to be using ground troops anyway. Think about it. If your not going to use a land invasion why have them there. And should have moved them out long ago. The writing is on the wall that from now on China and Russia will need to deal with them and we are clear of our own people in harms way if they cannot. Because we are not going to ground invade. We going to use other methods on them if so called to do so. And it will be with full invite of those neighbors most likely if we do.

[Chojin Man]

Now look what you started Mango. You brought Rooster out of his dungeon.

[Beemer]

ya so

Now look what you started Mango. You brought Rooster out of his dungeon.

his post made a point did you get it

[FalconGuy016]

I know firsthand of the military capacity of North Korea... its largely a joke. However, they have high numbers, some limited technology, and most imporatantly a suicidal motivation (many factors for that but, thats just the case). A one on one fight with U.S. would be slaughter (although should not be deemed particularily easy) for the North Koreans, but they are a threat to one of our good allies, the South Koreans, where I happen to be half from. Although they are much better equipped and trained (go U.S.A) they are still a lesser force that the North Koreans have a better chance beating on. While they might not WIN a war, they could devastate large portions of the country. I am not including possible terrorists attacks from the North Koreans though... although I think thats pretty unlikely because they would fear invasion - a place they would lose.