Eratosphere Forums - Metrical Poetry, Free Verse, Fiction, Art, Critique, Discussions Able Muse - a review of poetry, prose and art

Forum Left Top

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 07-10-2017, 05:19 AM
William A. Baurle William A. Baurle is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Arizona, USA
Posts: 1,847
Default Being the Good Guy. Good Grief.

I can only imagine how this thread will go.

The US is trying like hell to let the loony in charge of North Korea know that he hasn't got a chance in hell of "winning" in any kind of military conflict.

But the loony in charge of North Korea is so insulated and comfy, that he really imagines he can wage war against the FREAKIN United States.

Anyone on the planet knows that the US is armed to the teeth and is extremely powerful.

I am NOT an alt-right fanboy, but am in fact, a classical liberal. Hence:

I would rather that my country spent more money on far more immediate problems like hunger, poverty, silliness in the schools and universities, rampant crime, the terrible imbalance of wealth - the fact that actors and athletes are making MILLIONS while common workers like ME are making next to nothing...

etc, etc.

BUT -

Will someone tell that loony in charge of North Korea that he cannot possibly win a war against the United States?

Thanks.

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2017/07...mbing-run.html

Last edited by William A. Baurle; 07-10-2017 at 05:24 AM.
  #2  
Old 07-10-2017, 05:28 AM
Quincy Lehr's Avatar
Quincy Lehr Quincy Lehr is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Los Angeles, CA, USA
Posts: 5,252
Default

On it.

Seriously, though, Fox wants this war every bit as badly is CNN wants to ramp up conflict with the Rooskies, and it shows in the shoddy reporting. Indeed, one needn't be an apologist for North Korea to note that there have been plenty of American provocations, AS THIS LINK, ALSO FROM FOX NEWS, MAKES CLEAR. Of the two countries in question, one has actually used nuclear weapons, and indeed, considered USING THEM IN THE KOREAN WAR, or at least wanted to give the impression that such a thing was possible.
  #3  
Old 07-10-2017, 05:31 AM
William A. Baurle William A. Baurle is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Arizona, USA
Posts: 1,847
Default

Thanks, Quincy, checking links.

Quote:
A North Korean test of an ICBM is a momentous step forward for Pyongyang as it works to build an arsenal of long-range nuclear-armed missiles that can hit anywhere in the United States
But, they won't hit their targets, because they'll be obliterated in the air.

And so it goes...

Time for some soothing Rammstein:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rr8ljRgcJNM - ["this is NOT a love song"]

Reading the other link...

Last edited by William A. Baurle; 07-10-2017 at 05:51 AM.
  #4  
Old 07-12-2017, 02:50 AM
Ann Drysdale's Avatar
Ann Drysdale Ann Drysdale is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Old South Wales (UK)
Posts: 3,555
Default

If an armed warhead is intercepted en route, what happens to any fallout? Does contamination of a non-combatant country count as collateral damage? And who, should this happen, would be deemed the aggressor?

This is about far more than a pair of power-hungry grotesques, is it not?
  #5  
Old 07-12-2017, 03:03 AM
William A. Baurle William A. Baurle is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Arizona, USA
Posts: 1,847
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ann Drysdale View Post
If an armed warhead is intercepted en route, what happens to any fallout? Does contamination of a non-combatant country count as collateral damage? And who, should this happen, would be deemed the aggressor?

This is about far more than a pair of power-hungry grotesques, is it not?
Yes! And that's an excellent question. I don't know the answer.

Yes, I would consider any damage done by an intercepted warhead as collateral damage and innocent lives lost: civilian casualties.

I have NO idea what happens to the material of a missile that has been destroyed. I imagine it is obliterated, as in blasted into very tiny, unharmful bits.

But I don't know.

Edited in: I think that this leader in North Korea just might be willing and able to actually do this. Edited in just now: Because he's a loony.

The aggressor would be whoever fired the first (hopefully obliterated) missile en route to a real, designated target, without provocation, I imagine.

Last edited by William A. Baurle; 07-12-2017 at 03:21 AM. Reason: sorry for all the editing.
  #6  
Old 07-12-2017, 03:27 AM
William A. Baurle William A. Baurle is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Arizona, USA
Posts: 1,847
Default

After searching around, and being bombarded with crap from the Net, I think this link might be sorta kinda helpful?

https://www.quora.com/What-would-hap...yed-in-mid-air

Bits:

Quote:
However, technology has progressed to the point where the same warhead of high yield could be compressed into smaller warheads. Coupled with the ability to have multiple independently targetable reentry vehicles (MIRV), you have multiple times the strength of the first nuclear bombs.

But back to the question, what happens when a nuclear bomb is intercepted? Thankfully, the casing that holds the concoction necessary for a nuclear explosion is extremely tough. However, they obviously can’t test a live version. We have past incidents that showed what happened to the older models.

During the 1966 Palomares B-52 crash, or the Palomares incident, a B-52G bomber broke upon upon collision with another plane and dropped its load of 4 hydrogen bombs! Fortunately, three were found on land quickly but the non-nuclear explosives in two of the weapons had detonated upon impact with the ground. It did not cause a chain reaction but only caused a leakage of the “dirty bomb ingredients”, resulting in the contamination of a 2-square-kilometer (490-acre) (0.78 square mile) area by plutonium. The fourth, which fell into the Mediterranean Sea, was recovered intact after a 2-month-long search.

The whole reason why creating a nuke is so tough is because precision is what matters: multiple explosive lenses have to be perfectly placed and go off at the same time. Plutonium or uranium is not like conventional explosives- a fire or a fall will not set them off.

What would most likely happen therefore is either a blanket of radioactive materials falling to Earth or multiple warheads that fall to the ground which immediately deserve a search and recover operation!

Last edited by William A. Baurle; 07-12-2017 at 03:35 AM.
  #7  
Old 07-12-2017, 07:52 AM
Ann Drysdale's Avatar
Ann Drysdale Ann Drysdale is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Old South Wales (UK)
Posts: 3,555
Default

Thanks. I looked up stuff as well, but it doesn't console me.

I am still bothered by the ethics, too.

I, Annie, have declared myself neutral and am happily cultivating my garden. Two big boys, Bingo and Bozo, who live either side of me, are having an argument. They have been bird-flipping, bad-mouthing and mooning one another for years and now they have declared war. Bozo has sent a nuclear missile to hurt Bingo. He has sent it right over my garden but there is no danger of its exploding till it gets to Bingo.

Bingo, however, has seen it coming and is determined to whack it before it gets to him. He "obliterates" it. Right over my garden. Plutonium (at the very least) rains down on my lupins and I start feeling unwell.

I reckon Bingo is more to blame than Bozo, but both big boys have run away and all my lupins are dying.

Stay on the case, Quincy.
.

Last edited by Ann Drysdale; 07-12-2017 at 08:39 AM. Reason: unease.
  #8  
Old 07-12-2017, 10:35 PM
William A. Baurle William A. Baurle is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Arizona, USA
Posts: 1,847
Default

I reckon Bozo is to blame because he shot the first missile. This is common sense, and not controversial in the least. ???

Should Bingo let the missile hit its target, killing who knows how many innocent people, or try to intercept the missile and destroy it, saving many lives, but possibly endangering others?

I was expecting the usual suspects to come in and suggest that the US would be the bad guys for actually intercepting a missile aimed at a US target. I'm rather surprised to read that you, Ann, are seemingly prepared to blame the US for destroying a missile headed for a city in the US. But that's what your Bozo and Bingo fable seems to indicate? Please tell me I've misunderstood you.


Quote:
I reckon Bingo is more to blame than Bozo...
- Ann D, post #7

Do you think it would be more ethical to allow a missile fired by North Korea at a city in America to hit its target, so as to avoid possibly injuring or killing innocents with debris from the fallout?

I believe these missiles are usually destroyed over the ocean, to minimize any collateral damage. Although the oceans are full of ships, and gracious beasties who could get hurt.

This reminds me of the logic behind people who are alarmed that Israel should defend herself from attacks. Israel is the baddie, for defending herself from relentless attacks, even though all she wants to do is live in peace on a tiny strip of desert. Hamas wishes to wipe Jews off the planet. Israel has no such desire to wipe anyone off the planet. But Israel is the baddie. That's lefty-loony logic for you.

Mind boggling.

Last edited by William A. Baurle; 07-12-2017 at 10:45 PM.
  #9  
Old 07-13-2017, 02:08 AM
Ann Drysdale's Avatar
Ann Drysdale Ann Drysdale is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Old South Wales (UK)
Posts: 3,555
Default

No, Bill, you didn't misunderstand me. The Bingo and Bozo scenario was an attempt to reduce a serious situation to Kindergarten basics and perhaps I should have known better. Re-introducing facts and alternative facts messes it up again.

I was basing my intervention on the title you chose for the thread and hoped to examine the entrails of good-guyness from the point of view of an innocent bystander, a self-appointed haruspex.

We must agree to differ. I shall return to my garden, on its tiny island between Lilliput and Blefuscu, and devote myself to the selective breeding of chickens that will eventually produce nothing but spherical eggs.
  #10  
Old 07-13-2017, 03:20 AM
William A. Baurle William A. Baurle is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Arizona, USA
Posts: 1,847
Default

I chose the thread title to describe the actual situation between North Korea and the US. The US, to my understanding, is trying to explain to North Korea, by a demonstration of force, that it doesn't stand a chance against her in a military conflict.

This show of force is NOT intended as a threat, or a provocation. It is quite literally done as a means of preventing North Korea from even thinking about initiating aggression.

Kim Jong-un lives in la-la land, and apparently does not realize what he is doing or what he is up against. As "supreme leader", he lives in a fantasy world. People think Trump lives in a fantasy world. Well, it ain't nothin' compared to Kim Jong-un's fantasy world.
Closed Thread

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump



Forum Right Top
Forum Left Bottom Forum Right Bottom
 
Right Left
Member Login
Forgot password?
Forum LeftForum Right


Forum Statistics:
Forum Members: 7,813
Total Threads: 18,338
Total Posts: 236,695
There are 88 users
currently browsing forums.
Forum LeftForum Right


Forum Sponsor:
Donate & Support Able Muse / Eratosphere
Forum LeftForum Right
Right Right
Right Bottom Left Right Bottom Right

Hosted by ApplauZ Online