Yet. They can’t make one that works yet.
I’m hoping for Post #5 (China handles it). Post #4 remains on the possible list.
A sad trombone is heard across the region.
Not to derail the thread, but with NK holding Seoul hostage, and probably having fully functional nuke-tipped ICBMs within a decade, just how much blackmail could they get away with?
Could they demand $10 billion payments from South Korea and Japan every year, “Write us a check every January 1st or we let the artillery fly?”
Could they coerce the UN into revoking every anti-Pyongyang resolution?
“Hey, free uranium!”
Right, and with Trump complaining about “America First”, it’s an open question whether he would back up our allies if they get attacked. Are we going to help South Korean? With Trump, who knows?
This. The trajectory might betray the missile’s intended course, but from a PR perspective it’s hard to do anything except say, “Meh, another “test” failed.”
Would the missile not have to be recovered to determine that it was armed with a weapon?
How are we going to know that this was a live nuke before some techie type waves a Geiger counter at it and says, “Oh shit!”
OTOH, as Shodan pointed out, I can’t see them launching just the big one and calling it a day. But I could see them holding position with the plan to followup during the period of panic and confusion that would inevitably happen immediately after a hostile nuclear attack.
ETA: Ninja’d by carnivorousplant while I was hitting the buffet line…
“Golden Corral”? :dubious:
If you were drinkin’ I’d let it go…
Obviously not, because blackmail generally depends on someone being able to demand payment while being relatively immune from retaliation. The Soviet Union couldn’t extort things from the West simply because they held Washington and London at risk; because the West held Moscow at equal risk.
The problem with this scenario is we do not know it is a disabled nuke until it lands in the water.
It is not the general course of things to wait until AFTER a nuclear missile lands to decide the response.
So the whole what happens when it does not go boom part never happens, it’s already too late.
And firing a broken nuke does not change*** intent***
Sure. If immediately after firing the nuclear missile, if the entire North Korean military surrendered and lined themselves up to be taken into custody by South Korea, if Kim Jong himself walked across the DMZ with his hands up, for eventual trial and execution - sure.
Well, except that more realistically, the missile would hit. Responding experts would find the remains of a dud fission bomb in the fragments. And in all the excitement, the USA might just open fire with the ICBMs before the surrender request could reach them. Also, any sort of belligerency - this isn’t an example of a shot at the SWAT truck. This is like you have one police officer in clear view, you aim a gun at his head, and you pull the trigger, and a pop sound is heard (from the primer detonating but not the powder). And you’ve still got your gun aimed at his head and are messing with it. Even if Kim Jong decided to surrender, he would probably first continue to be belligerent and want to negotiate a deal.
If they launch a nuke and it fails, one must expect that they will launch a nuke that might not fail, therefore the US must either strike or forget about protecting South Korea.
This isn’t a western movie in which the white hat only draws after the black hat draws, or waits while the black hat reloads after a misfire.
It’s not like the missile will have “NUKE” printed on it in letters we can read from orbit… we won’t know it’s a nuke of any kind until somebody dredges it up and opens it. The real question here is not “what happens if NK launches a disabled nuke at us,” it’s “what happens if NK launches a viable ICBM at us.”
As I understand it, the U.S. response to a North Korean ICBM launch would be to try to intercept it with one of the interceptors at Fort Greely, Alaska.
We are long past the point where an enemy launch would mean the US would have to immediately retaliate with all of our land-based ICBMs or else “lose them;” I think that was 1970s stuff. With ballistic missile submarines and NEACP the United States could absorb a first strike and still retaliate later while first pondering its options - and this is North Korea, not the Soviet Union - North Korea having less than 1% the strike capability of the USSR in its heyday.
ICBMs will probably always be assumed nuke-tipped unless there is good reason to believe otherwise. This was a concern brought up by Russia a few years ago when the Fast Global Strike (or whatever it was called) thing was being discussed, where the USA might use a conventionally-tipped ICBM to strike a target somewhere, and the Russians said that they wouldn’t be able to differentiate a nuke-tipped ICBM from a conventionally-tipped one.
I for one welcome nuclear war with North Korea. First, it means more room for ME and second, WE get to cut down on some of that excess population on the other side of the globe. Now, let’s get down to what is REALLY IMPORTANT, the 2017 NBA Playoffs.
Hotel dining room.
The wine and beer were free. 
Cool!
As for the nuke not working, somewhere there is a quote from a few decades back to the tune of, “No one who has tried to detonate a nuclear bomb has ever had it not go off.”
Dennis