Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Summary: The director of the CIA knows it, the readers of CNN know it, our intellence
agencies know it, i know it, you know it, but Alexander has not been told...
http://www2b.abc.net.au/news/forum/newsonline6/archives/archive9/newposts/9/topic98... 11/18/2005
ABC Online Forum Page 2 of 8
nukes that can reach Australia? After all, it seems our intelligence agencies cannot be trusted
to keep the prime minister informed.what information do we rely on? Is any of it just the
slightest bit accurate. As for Downer - it is probably safer to beleive the opposite of anything
he says.
http://www2b.abc.net.au/news/forum/newsonline6/archives/archive9/newposts/9/topic98... 11/18/2005
ABC Online Forum Page 3 of 8
So what now?
Sit round and wait til one lands?
Or do we do the rumpty, pinko,weenie left wing socialist peacenik thing and wrap ourselves in
copious quantities of Stalins "Last walk to the Woodheap" and hope for the best.
Downer, in claiming that Korea does not have this capacity, and then claiming that we are
justified in ignoring international law to attack North Korean interests on the high seas iand in
the air, is simply being mischievous. He appears to be saying that it is safe to attack North
Korean interests because they don't have the capacity to strike back, and that we NEED to
attack their interests because they pose a clear and present danger.
Either way, 85kg is STILL a lot lighter than a first-stage nuclear weapon, which even without
over-engineering (the first nukes for every country are always over-engineered) weigh at least
a tonne (the Hiroshima device weighed in at more than 10,000 pounds, didn't it?).
http://www2b.abc.net.au/news/forum/newsonline6/archives/archive9/newposts/9/topic98... 11/18/2005
ABC Online Forum Page 4 of 8
recent article Development of New Low-Yield Nuclear Weapons.. cohen and douglass..
"... consider the small sizes into which very respectable yields can be packaged. Warheads
whose weight lies in the 30 to 150 pound range can “have yields as low as 50 tons (high
explosive equivalent) to tens of kilotons, several times the size of the first nuclear weapons
that were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The most available warheads and easiest to
manage would be in the 100 ton to 1 or 2 kiloton range. Insofar as size is concerned, an
implosion nuclear warhead could be as small as a soccer ball and weigh less than 50 pounds.
The "Davy Crockett" warhead was developed in the early 1950s as the warhead for an Army
bazooka. It had yields in the tens to hundreds of tons and weighed only 40 pounds. A good
warhead design team such as the Soviets undoubtedly have at their Arzamov-16 laboratory
could probably pack ten kilotons or more into an even smaller package.” [ii] This also applies
to the Chinese who are very capable. Iraq, Iran, or North Korea might do just about as well,
considering the open revelations on nuclear warhead design."
Even if they could launch a nuke at Australia (and I'm pretty sure they couldn't) - that's all the
more reason to stop such technology falling into the wrong hands.
I certainly wouldn't want to see nukes the weight of your average st bernard being commonly
available
"A number of countries with regional ambitions do not welcome the U.S. role
as a stabilizing power in their regions and have not accepted it passively.
Because of their ambitions, they want to place restraints on the U.S.
capability to project power or influence into their regions. They see the
acquisition of missile and WMD technology as a way of doing so.
http://www2b.abc.net.au/news/forum/newsonline6/archives/archive9/newposts/9/topic98... 11/18/2005
ABC Online Forum Page 5 of 8
Since the end of the Cold War, the geopolitical environment and the roles
of ballistic missiles and weapons of mass destruction have both evolved.
Ballistic missiles provide a cost-effective delivery system that can be
used for both conventional and non-conventional weapons. For those seeking
to thwart the projection of U.S. power, the capability to combine ballistic
missiles with weapons of mass destruction provides a strategic counter to
U.S. conventional and information-based military superiority. With such
weapons, these nations can pose a serious threat to the United States, to
its forward-based forces and their staging areas and to U.S. friends and
allies.
a. North Korea
There is evidence that North Korea is working hard on the Taepo Dong 2
(TD-2) ballistic missile. The status of the system's development cannot be
determined precisely. Nevertheless, the ballistic missile test
infrastructure in North Korea is well developed. Once the system is
assessed to be ready, a test flight could be conducted within six months of
a decision to do so. If North Korea judged the test to be a success, the
TD-2 could be deployed rapidly. It is unlikely the U.S. would know of such
a decision much before the missile was launched. This missile could reach
major cities and military bases in Alaska and the smaller, westernmost
islands in the Hawaiian chain. Light-weight variations of the TD-2 could
fly as far as 10,000 km, placing at risk western U.S. territory in an arc
extending northwest from Phoenix, Arizona, to Madison, Wisconsin. These
variants of the TD-2 would require additional time to develop and would
likely require an additional flight test.
http://www2b.abc.net.au/news/forum/newsonline6/archives/archive9/newposts/9/topic98... 11/18/2005
ABC Online Forum Page 6 of 8
US want to be a regional power in the region. So what do they do? Noone can be allowed to
question their right to dominate and influence...
So NK has a few Medium ranged balistic missiles, currently they have only conventional
warheads on them, their ability to mount their current Neuks on these missiles would be the
same as strapping a car on the front of a racing bicycle, not very practical. Most of the current
NK retoric and bluster is exactly that. Lets call thier bluff and get their real capability out in the
open, Once this is revealed true negotiating positions will be known and we all will be better
off.
http://www2b.abc.net.au/news/forum/newsonline6/archives/archive9/newposts/9/topic98... 11/18/2005
ABC Online Forum Page 7 of 8
Whoopsie, have you forgotten who's standing at the front line? There's a whole bunch of
Korean people whose lives will be on the line in your little game. Are you sure that calling their
bluff is an option? This is not poker, you know. You may be able to walk away from the table,
but a lot of innocent people won't. Are you sure you have the right to risk their lives on your
gamble?
Interestingly, NK have not conducted a nuclear test. This is no doubt due to geographical and
environmental constraints, but it remains to be seen if their nukes, if they indeed have them
as they claim, would actually work.
After the collapse of the Soviet Union, it was revealed its lead in the missile-gap was
overstated to the extreme. Lacking the money to maintain its arsenal, if a nuclear exchange
had started between the USA and the USSR it is likely that perhaps half of the Soviet arsenal
would not have flown or detonated.
http://www2b.abc.net.au/news/forum/newsonline6/archives/archive9/newposts/9/topic98... 11/18/2005
ABC Online Forum Page 8 of 8
line. I think the most significantr part was the reasoning behind the document- the need to
have unimpeded regional influence and power.
they eventually discovered that the alcoholic coolant used in some of the aircraft had been
siphoned off to make "hooch". :) Kind of killed of the readiness of the wing. If I recall correctly,
the senior officers all went on snow shovelling excursions in siberia.
The views and opinions expressed belong to the individual/s who posted the message and not the ABC. The ABC
reserves the right to remove offensive or inappropriate messages.
http://www2b.abc.net.au/news/forum/newsonline6/archives/archive9/newposts/9/topic98... 11/18/2005