|
|
|
It is currently Thu Oct 31, 2024 3:50 pm
|
What should be US response to use of nukes?
Author |
Message |
Alpine
Site Supporter
Joined: Sat Aug 11, 2012 Posts: 7649
|
The situation in NK may get out of control. The dictator there is apparently insulated from reality and common sense and may act irrationally with the US naval group in the area and Trump finally putting our enemies on notice.
Also, Obama's aiding of Iran to acquire nukes may already have paid dividends for them, even the awesome Israeli intelligence agencies might not be fully up to date on their capability. They are a theocratic republic and the Ayatollah really may think Allah will either protect them or send them to paradise for starting WW3, or maybe they think they can get away with passing nukes off to terrorists and then claiming ignorance.
There are a few scenarios here.
-NK launches a nuke in the region at SK or (more likely) at Japan or at the US Naval group. -NK launches a nuke at HI or the West Coast (Seattle or LA)
-Iran passes a nuke off to a terrorist proxy like Hezbollah or Hamas and they sneak it in detonate it in the region (Israel/Saudi Arabia) -Iran passes a nuke off to a terrorist proxy like Hezbollah or Hamas and they sneak it in and detonate it inside the US -Iran attacks US ships (likely) or manages to get a missile to the east US coast (unlikely).
What should be the US response to the above scenarios if: -nuke detonates? -we intercept and destroy nuke and/or its a dud? (we have a lot of land and ship based interceptors and they have jumped light years in terms of capability and success).
My own thinking is if we or our allies get hit we HAVE to nuke back, or else M.A.D. gets broken and the Russians and Chinese start thinking that a first strike winnable war is possible. For M.A.D. to truly be upheld though we'd be required to launch our missiles before theirs have even hit, which means we hit them even if we stop their missiles or they are duds. How would China react if we put radioactive fallout right next to them?
If we get hit from a land-based nuke that terrorists or even a state snuck in we also have to hit back (and we can easily tell from the radiation where the material came from, where and how it was refined and who created it).
If we stop a nuke and we didn't launch during the stopping of it, I am less sure on what our response should be. Massive conventional bombing campaign? Conventional invasion war? At the very least we need to send all our blackops guys in to secure all remaining enemy nuke sites and production facilities.
_________________If you vote for Biden you are voting to be murdered when he sends Beto to come take your "semi automatic assault weapon" (any semi auto). If you have family or friends voting for Biden show them this and ask if they are willing to vote for your murder or maybe even their own if they are gun owners or live with any. https://nypost.com/2020/03/03/joe-biden ... n-control/Quote: “I want to make something clear, I’m going to guarantee you this is not the last you’ve seen of him (Beto),” Biden said Monday evening during a campaign rally in Dallas. “You’re (Beto) going to take care of the gun problem with me. You’re (Beto) going to be the one who leads this effort.” https://www.newsweek.com/beto-orourke-g ... ns-1465738Quote: [Beto O'Rourke Suggests Police Would 'Visit' Homes To Implement Proposed Assault Weapons Ban] "In that case, I think that there would be a visit by law enforcement to recover that firearm... ..."If someone does not turn in an AR-15 or an AK-47, one of these weapons of war...then that weapon will be taken from them"
|
Fri Apr 14, 2017 1:36 pm |
|
|
GeekWithGuns
Site Supporter
Location: Round Rock, TX Joined: Thu Mar 5, 2015 Posts: 3898
Real Name: Dave
|
Hi Alpine I think the whole underpinning of MAD is that our similarly armed adversaries are also sane and rational people. That has certainly been the case with the Russians and the Chinese over the history of the Cold War and our current post-Cold War period. Another underlying tenet is that each side has more than enough weaponry to completely obliterate the other. That has been the case with Russia since the late 1950's and certainly by the time President Kennedy took office.
In the United States, General Curtis LeMay oversaw the transition from WWII Army Air Corps through the inception of the USAF in 1947 and formed the Strategic Air Command into a nation killing instrument designed to utterly destroy the Soviet Union and it's allies in order to enforce the MAD principle. An organizational genius and one of the true founders of the modern USAF strategic forces.
The problem with North Korea and Iran is that they meet neither of these criteria. They are led by irrational people motivated by hate and they also lack the nuclear arsenals to inflict nation killing damage on us. The problem with a major nuclear retaliatory response to either of these countries is that either Russia or China could be drawn into an exchange as well leading to globally catastrophic war.
Also our beef is with the leadership of these countries. Hate to see millions of North Korean peasants, already oppressed by their own government, killed by our own retaliatory actions. It's the leadership that needs to go, not the people.
IMO the better course of action is theater and strategic missile defense programs, damn whether the Russians or Chinese are upset by it. The whole purpose of these systems is to knock out a limited number of missiles by a rogue player, not a full scale exchange so they really shouldn't upset the balance of MAD between the major players anyways.
Then we need to attack pre-emptively via conventional means to destroy these countries nuke programs before they get any further out of hand. It's far less expensive and painful to take them out now than to wait for one of our major cities to get glassed before we act.
_________________ There are dead horses yet to be slain.... - NWGunner
|
Fri Apr 14, 2017 2:02 pm |
|
|
AR15L
Site Supporter
Location: Nampa, Idaho Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2011 Posts: 19877
Real Name: Rick
|
Quote: NK launches a nuke at HI or the West Coast (Seattle)
What should be the US response to the above scenarios if: -nuke detonates? I, (and you), won't have to worry about anything ever again.
_________________ ‘What’s the point of being a citizen if an illegal gets all the benefits’
“I don’t know what he said at the end of the sentence I don’t really think he knows what he said either.”
"It's a big club, and you ain’t in it." George Carlin
|
Fri Apr 14, 2017 2:04 pm |
|
|
metrotps
Site Supporter
Location: Mountlake Terrace, WA Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2012 Posts: 259
|
"NK launches a nuke at Seattle."
Not much of a loss IMHO.
_________________ Blessed be the LORD, my rock, who trains my hands for war, and my fingers for battle!
|
Fri Apr 14, 2017 2:18 pm |
|
|
L_O_G
Site Supporter
Location: South Seattle Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2011 Posts: 13510
Real Name: JP
|
metrotps wrote: "NK launches a nuke at Seattle."
Not much of a loss IMHO. Being that MLT is 13 miles from Seattle, I would be worried
_________________ Yes I Do Have A Beautiful Daughter.. I Also Have A Gun, A Shovel, & An Alibi
|
Fri Apr 14, 2017 2:23 pm |
|
|
hkcavalier
Site Supporter
Location: NE WA Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2011 Posts: 5598
Real Name: The Dude
|
AR15L wrote: Quote: NK launches a nuke at HI or the West Coast (Seattle)
What should be the US response to the above scenarios if: -nuke detonates? I, (and you), won't have to worry about anything ever again. NK doesn't have any 20 megaton city ruiners. A 20 kiloton weapon (probably far more in line with what they have) as a groundburst would destroy downtown Seattle but even in Shoreline or Bellevue you'd probably survive.
_________________ "Wherever you go, there you are."
|
Fri Apr 14, 2017 2:24 pm |
|
|
RusoArmo
Site Supporter
Location: Lynnwood Joined: Thu Dec 6, 2012 Posts: 5443
Real Name: Sergey
|
I'm no military or nuke expert but I'd like to think that in the case NK is stupid enough to launch a nuke toward mainland or even Hawaii, the USA is technologically advanced enough to easily intercept it without issue.
At which point the appropriate response I think would be to tell Russia and China that we're going to fuck their shit up. Maybe drop some leaflets across NK telling them "Your eternal leaders are full of shit, we're going to bomb the fuck out of Pyongyang, GTFO"
_________________Sign up for Uber using this link and receive a bonus: https://partners.uber.com/i/1p9ey
|
Fri Apr 14, 2017 2:30 pm |
|
|
Raygun74
Site Supporter
Location: Somewhere in, WA Joined: Wed Apr 23, 2014 Posts: 451
Real Name: RickSanchez
|
I put ground zero near my office, wishful thinking. Long loading page http://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/
Last edited by Raygun74 on Fri Apr 14, 2017 2:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.
|
Fri Apr 14, 2017 2:31 pm |
|
|
metrotps
Site Supporter
Location: Mountlake Terrace, WA Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2012 Posts: 259
|
I figure all them "SnowFlakes" walking around and the hi-tech buildings Paul Allen has been building down in the Westlake area, would absorb most of the blast. Then the Mayor would suck up the fallout after he slithers out of his bunker. LOL
_________________ Blessed be the LORD, my rock, who trains my hands for war, and my fingers for battle!
|
Fri Apr 14, 2017 2:33 pm |
|
|
jdhbulseye
Site Supporter
Location: Rochester, WA Joined: Thu Mar 10, 2016 Posts: 3761
Real Name: Mr. Idgaf
|
_________________MadPick wrote: Without penetration data, the pics aren't of much use. - Spoiler: show
- "Half the harm that is done in this world is due to people who want to feel important. They don't mean to do harm -- but the harm does not interest them. Or they do not see it, or they justify it because they are absorbed in the endless struggle to think well of themselves." – T.S. Eliot
"The right of self defence is the first law of nature: in most governments it has been the study of rulers to confine this right within the narrowest limits possible. Wherever standing armies are kept up, and the right of the people to keep and bear arms is, under any colour or pretext whatsoever, prohibited, liberty, if not already annihilated, is on the brink of destruction." - St. George Tucker
A careful definition of words would destroy half the agenda of the political left and scrutinizing evidence would destroy the other half. - Thomas Sowell
"To ban guns because criminals use them is to tell the innocent and law-abiding that their rights and liberties depend not on their own conduct, but on the conduct of the guilty and the lawless, and that the law will permit them to have only such rights and liberties as the lawless will allow...
For society does not control crime, ever, by forcing the law-abiding to accommodate themselves to the expected behavior of criminals. Society controls crime by forcing the criminals to accommodate themselves to the expected behavior of the law-abiding." - Jeff Snyder
Personal weapons are what raised mankind out of the mud, and the rifle is the queen of personal weapons. The possession of a good rifle, as well as the skill to use it well, truly makes a man the monarch of all he surveys. It realizes the ancient dream of the Jovian thunderbolt, and as such it is the embodiment of personal power. For this reason it exercises a curious influence over the minds of most men, and in its best examples it constitutes an object of affection unmatched by any other inanimate object.
Jeff Cooper 1997 The Art of the Rifle Page 1.
- Spoiler: show
- SUGGEST CASE BE SUBMITTED ON APPELLANT'S BRIEF. UNABLE TO OBTAIN ANY MONEY FROM CLIENTS TO BE PRESENT & ARGUE BRIEF.
The defense attorney's telegram to the clerk of the Supreme Court, March 29, 1939, in re United States. v. Miller.
You don't need to go to Law School to understand the constitutional implications of that.
“You can’t cut the throat of every cocksucker whose character it would improve.” - Spoiler: show
cityslicker wrote: I don't want to be told that I can't remove the tree by some tree-hugging pole smoker from the eat-a-dick foundation/Olympia/King County.
|
Fri Apr 14, 2017 2:36 pm |
|
|
Pablo
Site Supporter
Location: Everson, WA Joined: Sun Jan 6, 2013 Posts: 28386
Real Name: Ace Winky
|
Any state that launches or otherwise delivers and detonates a thermonuclear device in the USA or our allies shall be completely and utterly obliterated.
_________________ Why does the Penguin in Batman sound like a duck?
Because the eagle sounds like a hawk.
|
Fri Apr 14, 2017 2:38 pm |
|
|
RusoArmo
Site Supporter
Location: Lynnwood Joined: Thu Dec 6, 2012 Posts: 5443
Real Name: Sergey
|
Playing on Nuke Maps with a 20kt in Seattle.
As long as it hits near like 2nd Ave or Columbia Tower and is Airburst, I'll be aight on Queen Anne Ave
_________________Sign up for Uber using this link and receive a bonus: https://partners.uber.com/i/1p9ey
|
Fri Apr 14, 2017 2:40 pm |
|
|
AR15L
Site Supporter
Location: Nampa, Idaho Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2011 Posts: 19877
Real Name: Rick
|
Who says he can even aim that thing?
_________________ ‘What’s the point of being a citizen if an illegal gets all the benefits’
“I don’t know what he said at the end of the sentence I don’t really think he knows what he said either.”
"It's a big club, and you ain’t in it." George Carlin
|
Fri Apr 14, 2017 2:41 pm |
|
|
mcyclonegt
Site Supporter
Location: West Olympia Joined: Mon May 28, 2012 Posts: 6840
Real Name: Matt
|
RusoArmo wrote: I'm no military or nuke expert but I'd like to think that in the case NK is stupid enough to launch a nuke toward mainland or even Hawaii, the USA is technologically advanced enough to easily intercept it without issue.
At which point the appropriate response I think would be to tell Russia and China that we're going to fuck their shit up. Maybe drop some leaflets across NK telling them "Your eternal leaders are full of shit, we're going to bomb the fuck out of Pyongyang, GTFO" I'm with you on this. I am fairly confident we would be able to intercept anything coming across the pacific. If not from Hawaii, Bremerton or Portland. When a couple flew into SeaTac when obama was in town a few years back in a prop plane it took less than ten minutes for fighters to get from Portland to SeaTac. They were over mcchord before we were even notified. Not really that worried
_________________ "I'm Hub McCann. I've fought in two World Wars and countless smaller ones on three continents. I led thousands of men into battle with everything from horses and swords to artillery and TANKS! I've seen the headwaters of the Nile, and tribes of natives no white man had ever seen before. I've won and lost a dozen fortunes, KILLED MANY MEN! And loved only one woman, with a passion a FLEA like you could never begin to understand. That's who I am. NOW, GO HOME, BOY!"
"I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones". Albert Einstein 1947
|
Fri Apr 14, 2017 2:57 pm |
|
|
GeekWithGuns
Site Supporter
Location: Round Rock, TX Joined: Thu Mar 5, 2015 Posts: 3898
Real Name: Dave
|
RusoArmo wrote: I'm no military or nuke expert but I'd like to think that in the case NK is stupid enough to launch a nuke toward mainland or even Hawaii, the USA is technologically advanced enough to easily intercept it without issue.
At which point the appropriate response I think would be to tell Russia and China that we're going to fuck their shit up. Maybe drop some leaflets across NK telling them "Your eternal leaders are full of shit, we're going to bomb the fuck out of Pyongyang, GTFO" Ballistic missile defense is pretty complex. The US has been working on it steadily since the days of President Reagan. It is complicated by several factors: - Defense against liquid fueled (longer boost phase/burn) vs solid rocket motor (shorter boost phase) ballistic missiles - Variety of different kinds of ballistic missiles (short range, medium range, IRBM/intermediate, ICBM/strategic) - Whether ballistic missile has a unitary warhead or multiple, independently targeted re-entry vehicles - Whether ballistic missile is targeted in boost, mid-course, or terminal phase Basically the US has several dozen interceptor missiles currently stationed in Fort Greely, Alaska and Vandenberg AFB, California which target ICBM strategic ballistic missiles in mid-course trajectory and are designed to shoot down North Korean missile threats approaching the US mainland. This is known as ground-based mid-course defense. Roughly half the tests have been successful so MAYBE a fifty-fifty chance of a rogue missile shootdown exists. https://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/usmissiledefenseThere are also theater based missile defense programs as well as sea-based defense systems against short, medium, and IRBM threats (Aegis system) which may be more useful to defend South Korea and Japan. It's far from certain that we can intercept an incoming ballistic missile. Our own LGM-30 Minuteman III ICBM, for instance, reaches a maximum speed of 15,000 mph (6-7 km/sec) at booster motor burnout. These incoming warheads are knocked down by a direct kinetic strike. Think of the challenges in hitting a 15,000 mph target with another missile and you get an idea how hard this can be and why we don't have a reliable continental missile defense system after thirty years of development. https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-speed-of-an-intercontinental-ballistic-missile
_________________ There are dead horses yet to be slain.... - NWGunner
|
Fri Apr 14, 2017 2:58 pm |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
|
|