Korea and The US.

[KateLMead]

I do not for a moment argue with the NK computing power capabilities, but reducing the size/wieght of a warhead is another matter. To then make it accurately deliverable over thousands of miles is not down to software. It has to be made physically possible. That is not easy.

You two lads are so well informed when it comes to political matters, like many women I am not.. I find your's and suffs posts brilliant and informative.. All those weights and measures leave my head in a spin. however
No less frightening... I think "We need to be afraid" Before we get involved we need to remember the struggle we faced in the last war until Pearl Harbour was attacked and how we pleaded for help" and thinking ahead if there is a threat to us, all immigrants of age should be called up "Bring back National Service" ..

[Suff]

To then make it accurately deliverable over thousands of miles is not down to software. It has to be made physically possible. That is not easy.

GPS is everyone's friend. They're not looking to put it down a chimney after all, just over a city....

[Suff]

Reading an analysts report on the NK satellite launch, reveals several things about their capability.

I found two compelling statements in the whole article

Ballistic missiles, on the other hand, have a different goal. Their objective is to deliver a payload to another spot on the Earth. To do so, they need to accelerate the payload to a very high speed, although significantly slower than the space launch vehicle

and after separation of the second stage the third stage was turned before igniting. <snip> This is sophisticated stuff from a country that's never had a successful space launch before.

Whilst the Satellite did not achieve what they wanted, there is no doubt that they have technology and capability to deliver "payloads" from one part of the earth to another.

That report was designed to allay fears. Not to reveal the whole truth....

[Workingman]

GPS is not needed. Clever maths at takeoff and in flight do the job.

The very best NK rockets have a range of about 6,000 km. They could hit Alaska, but not mainland USA, but only with a payload of about 500kg.

A tactical nuke weighs slightly more than that, but can be fired from most 6"/8"Howitzers at short range. There is not one iota of evidence that the NK has the technology to produce anything like them and then fit them to a gun. Their main use is to produce short lived, but lethal, radiation rather then physical damage.

The bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki weighed in at about 4,500kg. The data from seismic evidence suggest that the NK nukes are similar in yield - and possibly similar in size/weight.

Putting it altogether: NK has a viable nuke, but no way to hit the US. SK could be hit with an aircraft carried weapon, if it could get through - but then the NK roof would fall in.

We are not on the verge of WW3 by a long way.

[Suff]

We are not on the verge of WW3 by a long way.

Absolutely not.

However if we look at the SS18 data sheet, we find that their 500kt warheads using 1960's technology (they didn't use 70's technology till the 80's just like us), weighed about 400kg and their 250kt device weighed abouto 250kg. Note the yield to weight difference.

Most of the advances in US and UK nuclear weapons happened in the 80's and the Americans only stopped testing when they could reliably predict the outcome by computer model. As soon as they could do that, they then tried to ban all testing around the world to stop anyone else catching up.

However software and hardware have advanced exponentially since that time. There can be NO assumptions as to the number of tests required or the quality of the end result when it comes to nuclear weapons.

We aren't heading for WW3, but we absolutely must assume that NK has a greater capability than we think. Only by doing that will be be prepared and make the right choices.

[Aggers]

We are not on the verge of WW3 by a long way.

Absolutely not..

I hope you're right.

I'm not so confident.

[Suff]

Both of the "world wars" of history happened, mainly, because of a lack of preparedness, communication and understanding in the military of the potential situation in the countries concerned.

Today that does not hold true. In fact we have more information than we could possibly analyse. Also both world wars were in a conventional world. Whilst the world may have become somewhat blasé about nuclear weapons, the threat to world stability holds true. Nobody will underestimate them. They may, in fact, overreact to small moves. NK could find itself being wiped off the map purely by presenting a "credible threat" rather than actually acting. Russia and China will allow it because the "threat" is more than they are willing to tolerate.

Tinpot dictators with nuclear weapons stand at a place in time where they can be simply rubbed out with impunity. This has not held true since WWII but was a regular occurrence of "threats" prior to the nuclear age. The North Korean's (and most of the rest of the world for that matter), have no clue how truly dangerous this situation is for NK. What I worry about most is not what this will do to NK but what it will do to our rights and freedoms if the west feel they have to eradicate a county of millions of people. And the rest of the world let them.

Although it might be a salient point for Argentina.....