North Korea Unveils Two New Strategic Missiles in October 10 Parade

[Ransom]

You mean a long way from 50 years ago? Sure. We even have microwave ovens now too.

Long way concerning what's considered sophisticated. A Stinger isn't a sophisticated weapons system, just wanting you to know is all.

Geez.

[Ransom]

True but lack of money just makes the time longer. It doesn’t stop the progress. We will eventually have to decide how we are going to deal with this in the future. And not just with NK.

True, we will have to confront this issue. Nuclear weapon technology nearly 80 years old, nations such as Pakistan already nuclear capable. And besides the weapon, ballistic missile capability another threat to the US. Not only our mainland but carrier strike groups, troop deployments like South Korea or Guam.

How much time and effort we put in top defending ourselves against the sophisticated Stinger missile system...…..only time will tell.

[Peter1469]

NORTH KOREA’S TWO NEW STRATEGIC MISSILES: WHAT DO WE KNOW AND WHAT DO THEY MEAN FOR US DETERRENCE?

City-busters.

[COLOR=rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.88)]Its size, power, and payload make the missile perfect for city-busting countervalue attacks on the United States, and by extension most of North America, and potentially in the future for counterforce strikes depending on its level of accuracy. The missile could also be intended to overwhelm US missile defenses that [/COLOR]fire a salvo of four interceptor missiles[COLOR=rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.88)] at each warhead. The United States would need twelve to sixteen interceptors per missile for a potential successful kill—at a [/COLOR]cost of around a billion dollars[COLOR=rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.88)]. Even a small force of North Korea’s new missiles with their heavy payload of several warheads would thereby provide the basis of a credible deterrent where some warheads would likely get through to North American cities presenting a real challenge to existing US missile defenses, if not rendering them irrelevant in the near future.

[/COLOR][COLOR=rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.88)]All of this suggests very strongly that North Korea is developing a nuclear deterrent along the path of other traditional nuclear powers, which will include a variety of strategic systems—a deterrent that, for anybody who still harbors [/COLOR]hope that denuclearization is possible[COLOR=rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.88)], they have no intentions of giving up. A likely test of either of the Pukguksong-4 SLBM or the new ICBM could come in the next month or two, possibly prior to the US presidential election for potential impact on its outcome. Both strategic systems represent a serious challenge to US security interests at home and abroad and will most likely require a new and robust approach to nuclear deterrence, force structure, doctrine, and the size of US Missile Defense.[/COLOR]

[COLOR=rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.88)][/COLOR]

[Private Pickle]

Pickle the only real nut bars who are working on nukes that I know of right now are Iran and nk . they both want them as bargaining tools. Both know if they use one we will stomp them like ant

Today I suppose that is true. Tomorrow we have Pakistan, India, China all of which already have nukes.

[Private Pickle]

Long way concerning what's considered sophisticated. A Stinger isn't a sophisticated weapons system, just wanting you to know is all.

Geez.

50 years ago the Stinger was the most sophisticated shoulder-fired surface-to-air missile we had. Why do you think we supplied and trained the Afghanis how to use it against the Russian gun ships and jets?

[Private Pickle]

True, we will have to confront this issue. Nuclear weapon technology nearly 80 years old, nations such as Pakistan already nuclear capable. And besides the weapon, ballistic missile capability another threat to the US. Not only our mainland but carrier strike groups, troop deployments like South Korea or Guam.

How much time and effort we put in top defending ourselves against the sophisticated Stinger missile system...…..only time will tell.

I think you’re stuck in the 70’s although even the 50 year old technology of the stinger poses a threat to our air forces. Kinda a shame we supplied it to them and trained them on how to use it effectively.

[Ransom]

I think you’re stuck in the 70’s although even the 50 year old technology of the stinger poses a threat to our air forces. Kinda a shame we supplied it to them and trained them on how to use it effectively.

The Stinger may pose a tiny threat to our helicopters or low flying drones, not our air forces. And it's not me, it's the North Koreans who are stuck in the 70's. They have nuclear capability, they can spin uranium, they can develop nuclear weapons when their southern neighbor develops Kia and sells them worldwide. They cannot get a missile over the horizon, Pickle, that you now know is much farther than 11 miles away. They cannot fire a rocket into space and re-enter our atmosphere, never mind accuracy.

In stark contrast. The US in response to a recent NK short range missile test....launched an unarmed Trident intercontinental ballistic missile from a submerged submarine under the Caribbean Sea striking a floating seagull's ass in the East China Sea that was its' target. We're not stuck in the 70's, they are.

[Private Pickle]

The Stinger may pose a tiny threat to our helicopters or low flying drones, not our air forces. And it's not me, it's the North Koreans who are stuck in the 70's. They have nuclear capability, they can spin uranium, they can develop nuclear weapons when their southern neighbor develops Kia and sells them worldwide. They cannot get a missile over the horizon, Pickle, that you now know is much farther than 11 miles away. They cannot fire a rocket into space and re-enter our atmosphere, never mind accuracy.

In stark contrast. The US in response to a recent NK short range missile test....launched an unarmed Trident intercontinental ballistic missile from a submerged submarine under the Caribbean Sea striking a floating seagull's ass in the East China Sea that was its' target. We're not stuck in the 70's, they are.

I didn’t say “we”. I said you.

You’re right. It’s not 11 miles. Much shorter.

For instance, in standard atmospheric conditions, for an observer with eye level above sea level by 1.70 metres (5 ft 7 in), the horizon is at a distance of about 5 kilometres (3.1 mi).^[2]

[Ransom]

I didn’t say “we”. I said you.

You’re right. It’s not 11 miles. Much shorter.

You didn't say anything. You wrote it. We should discuss other topics, sophisticated anything ain't your bag.

[Private Pickle]

You didn't say anything. You wrote it. We should discuss other topics, sophisticated anything ain't your bag.

Deep.