Most Read
    Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

    Did Norks Nuke Again?

    Did Norks Nuke Again?

    South Korea thinks so, via AP:

    North Korea is believed to have conducted a widely anticipated nuclear test Tuesday, following an earthquake that monitoring agencies around the globe said appeared to be unnatural.

    The South Korean Defense Ministry, which raised its military alert level after the quake, said it was trying to determine whether it was a test. Nuclear blasts can create tremors but they are distinct from those caused by natural earthquakes.

    A world nuclear test monitoring organization detected what it called an “unusual seismic event” in North Korea.

    “The event shows clear explosion-like characteristics and its location is roughly congruent with the 2006 and 2009 DPRK nuclear tests,” said Tibor Tóth, the executive secretary of the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty Organization. The DPRK refers to North Korea’s formal name, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea.

    The NY Times further reports:

    It may take days or weeks to determine if the test, if that is what it proves to be, was successful. But American officials will also be looking for signs of whether the North, for the first time, conducted a test of a uranium weapon, based on a uranium enrichment capability it has been pursuing for a decade. The past two tests used plutonium, reprocessed from one of the country’s now-defunct nuclear reactors. While the country only has enough plutonium for a half-dozen or so bombs, it can produce enriched uranium well into the future.

    Iowahawk is all over this one:

    Update: The Norks confirm:

    North Korea confirmed on Tuesday that it had conducted its third, long-threatened nuclear test, according to the official K.C.N.A. news service, posing a new challenge for the Obama administration in its effort to keep the country from becoming a full-fledged nuclear power.

    The K.C.N.A. said the North used a “miniaturized and lighter nuclear device with greater explosive force than previously” and that the test “did not pose any negative impact on the surrounding ecological environment.”

    DONATE

    Donations tax deductible
    to the full extent allowed by law.

    Comments



     
     0 
     
     0
    Ragspierre | February 12, 2013 at 11:14 am

    What difference, at this point, does it make…?

    “miniaturized and lighter nuclear device with greater explosive force than previously”

    Still working on perfecting that EMP bomb. One day the DPRK and the Iranians are going to ship some crates all over the US via UPS and Fedex and when they go boom in the air over our major cities, the US will dissolve into chaos. The resulting EMP will destroy the entire telecom and computer networks running the country.

    The bungling idiots in DC still don’t get it. Their moment in the sun requires our decent into darkness. There is no peaceful coexistence or the win/win scenario.


     
     0 
     
     0
    Subotai Bahadur | February 12, 2013 at 1:21 pm

    It is always dangerous to accept anything that the Norks or the New York Times say. However; The K.C.N.A. said the North used a “miniaturized and lighter nuclear device with greater explosive force than previously”,if there is any truth at all to the statement it could be indicative of a uranium gun device. Plutonium devices are generally of the implosion variety, which is far harder to do for a number of reasons. Higher yield for the amount of fissile material, but a lot harder to do. The reasons have been open source for decades. Anyone who has studied first year physics could design the outlines of a uranium gun-type device.

    dscott | February 12, 2013 at 11:16 am

    I do not doubt the high probability of a Nork attack by smuggling in devices. Miniaturization of a device is one of the technological hurdles, and shipping in one aboard a vessel into port cities obviates the need to go through that. Similar attacks by way of shipping containers to inland cities could be done at a much higher risk of detection.

    However, to conduct an EMP attack using nuclear devices would entail launching, probably with a SCUD variant, off of a ship. To get the EMP effect, the detonation has to be in the ionosphere [at least, say roughly 20 miles high] to induce the Compton Scattering Effect that creates the EMP. The EMP effect will cover the visible horizon from the point of detonation.

    There are non-nuclear devices capable of producing a very localized EMP pulse, but they would not have the widespread effect of an ionospheric nuclear detonation.

    Smuggling a device into the interior would not give the EMP effect unless you also smuggled in a way to boost it to 20 miles high. Not easy.

    But are we at risk of being the target of Nork nukes in one form or another? Definitely. Does the current administration give an obese rodent’s gluteal musculature? No, they think they are immune from reality.

    Subotai Bahadur


     
     0 
     
     0
    Henry Hawkins | February 12, 2013 at 3:57 pm

    Guess who promised in 2008 to denuclearize North Korea?


    Leave a Comment

    Leave a Reply

    You must be logged in to post a comment.

    Notify me of followup comments via e-mail (or subscribe without commenting.)

    Font Resize
    Contrast Mode
    Send this to a friend