We know that North Korea has some 13,000 artillery pieces aimed at Seoul and it’s 25+ million residents. We also know there are over 30,000 American troops defending the border.
They also have missiles with conventional warheads.
Unless the United States strikes preemptively with surprise, speed, and incredibly powerful weaponry, that is, nukes, there are likely to be casualties the likes of which we haven’t seen since World War Two.
In my readings today I discovered that the United States has one nuclear warhead, the B61-12 gravity bomb, which seems to be ideally suited for use against North Korea. It is a comparatively low yield nuclear explosive with near pinpoint accuracy and minimal radioactive fallout. The US also has the B61 Mod 11, deployed in 1997, which is a ground-penetrating bunker buster. I can see Trump, if he becomes aware of how these could be used, might tell his generals to utilize them in a massive preemptive strike.
If the United States engages militarily with N. Korea my assumption, as a person with only general knowledge and certainly not an actual general, is that using our nuclear arsenal to maximum destructive effect will be seriously considered.
As I thought about the drawbacks of doing this, aside from killing many millions of innocent North Koreans, was what would be the consequences of the radioactive fallout drifting over China, South Korea and Japan.
It turns out that this would not be much of a consideration. Thanks to a timely article in Forbes (ironically from this Valentines Day) we can understand the science about why this is:
Radioactive fallout is not a common result from using nuclear weapons.
In the decades following WWII, we spent lots of time and money researching the characteristics and effects of nuclear detonations, particularly fallout, especially when we did above-ground weapons testing before 1961. We know how to generate more fallout, or less fallout, or no fallout at all, by detonating the weapon at various heights above the ground.
But the generation of fallout is inversely proportional to destructive power, which means that if you want the biggest bang with the most destruction, which is the whole point of using such weapons, you won’t generate much fallout.
In the over 200 above-ground atomic and nuclear bomb tests in the 15 years following WWII, fallout was minor in 99% of them. Residual dose rates at almost all of these test sites are very low (< 0.001 Sv/yr), less than the natural background radiation that was there before the tests.
The real horror about using atomic or nuclear weapons is that conventional destruction takes an entire military to deliver over some length of time. So there is a chance to counter it. But delivery of nuclear weapons is quick and the effects are immediate, with little possibility to counter them.
The mess this world might be heading towards is much more complicated than science fiction, but radioactive fallout is one of the least of our worries.
Dr. James Conca is an expert on energy, nuclear and dirty bombs, a planetary geologist, and a professional speaker.
Learning these facts from Forbes has not made me sanguine about Trump choosing restraint if he’s provoked by Kim il-Un.
I could see a measured retaliation to a provocation easily and rapidly escalating closer and closer actual war. The closer we got to war, I see Trump being offered any number of options. Ideally of course I hope saner minds in both N. Korea and among Trump’s advisors would come together and finally agree to serious negotiations. That’s what normal world leaders would do. Unfortunately we have two impulsive leaders, with Kim having proved how ruthless he is, and with Trump driven by a macho ego.
Somebody conversant with modern warfare please weigh in; but it seems to be that the equation favors Trump choosing the option that would end the North Korean threat entirely.
Update: There is no winning such a war from a moral standpoint because although Trump would claim victory for his Great America, the United States would go down in history as a genocidal superpower that killed nearly an entire population.
Tuesday, Apr 18, 2017 · 3:52:05 AM +00:00 · HalBrown
hope Trump’s generals would a strong case against launching even a single nuclear weapon, and stop him from pressing the nuclear button himself. I read long ago, and seen it repeated recently, how Nixon’s Defense Secretary took away his power to initiate a nuclear war in the final days before his resignation..
SECRET LIVES
The Most Patriotic Act of Treason in American History?
As President Nixon’s list of enemies grew long and his grip on reality fragile, one prominent member of his government prepared the military to commit treason.
It sounds more Hollywood than history. A paranoid president, unhinged, drinking heavily, ranting against his enemies, terrifies subordinates. The defense secretary commits what may be the most patriotic act of treason in American history: ordering the Joint Chiefs of Staff to ignore any White House military initiatives lacking his signature.
Most historians believe that as Richard Nixon staggered toward resignation in 1974, Secretary of Defense James R. Schlesinger undermined the president’s constitutional authority. The late Watergate expert Stanley Kutler was skeptical, asking where was the paper trail? But who would write down such orders? It is more believable that this prickly, patriotic, public servant risked his career to save America rather than risking his reputation by inventing such a crazy story.
www.thedailybeast.com/...
Tuesday, Apr 18, 2017 · 4:01:28 AM +00:00
·
HalBrown
Update — just published tonight: www.cnn.com/…
Pentagon begins review of nuclear weapons policy
"If you look back not just to the 2010 nuclear posture review, but if you look back 20 years ... you see a fundamental de-emphasis of nuclear weapons in our national security strategy," said Gen. John Hyten, commander of US Strategic Command, which oversees America's nuclear forces.
"Our adversaries have taken the exact opposite view of our de-emphasis and have emphasized those nuclear capabilities once again," he added, referencing Russian and Chinese efforts to modernize and upgrade their respective nuclear forces.
The US has also pursued some modernization efforts regarding its arsenal, including conducting a non-nuclear flight test last month of its B61-12 gravity bomb.
That test involved the dropping of a modernized version of the bomb, first developed in the 1960s, from an F-16 at Tonopah Test Range in Nevada.
The 2010 report listed nuclear terrorism and proliferation as the primary nuclear threats and said, "Russia and the United States are no longer adversaries."
Given mounting tensions with Moscow in the years following its 2014 invasion and annexation of Crimea, it's likely that this year's review will take a markedly different tone.