• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

North Korea threatening to turn D.C. into a sea of fire.

Forums New posts

Free episodes:

North Korea works as a wonderful buffer for China between the US and itself. All this cyclical NK sabre rattling strikes me more as a cry for help. NK is not a well off country and can little sustain any prolonged aggression. As stated earlier, China is in it for the long haul and US debt is not something it wants to squander or call in but continue to use as leverage. It also is not interested in having war at its doorstep and would prefer NK to behave like a rabid junkyard dog, snarling and yowling wildly as it does.

If there were any available nukes in the hands of any extremist they would have already gone off. They are a willful bunch.

The meme of fear continues a la Eric Bogosian at the close of Sex, Drugs and Rock 'n' Roll. If we tun off the microwave ovens and tv's it's a lot harder for them to pump in those messages of fear and consumption.
 
What I was wondering as I went through this thread has any established state ever hinted at the use of suitcase bombs. It always seems to be about nuclear and chemical missles. Any time I've heard the subject of suitcase nukes being breached it has been via thought experiments by pundits and non state terrorist organizations. I would think that any state that wanted to cause more anxiety would at least hint at it i.e "we could f*** you up and you wouldn't even know its us" Rather they all brag about their ability to get to you via missles or air power

The fear of Suitcase bombs planted by agents may turn out to be passe .when drone technology becomes more widespread... ...or the drones will initially add another dimension to the delivery of a suitcase nuke... Even if drones can't be made "spoof proof" it certainly does add another element to an organizations arsenal, state and non-state alike.
 
Mike, I completely agree that we can amicably disagree - no issue there. What I'm responding to is what I perceive as a disconnect between what im actually saying and what your taking away from our conversation.

I'm not arguing that I'm "right" and therefore you're "wrong". I'm advocating for being understood and resisting an unfortunate characterization of my thoughts. My thinking is, if we can appreciate each others opinions, we will both be better off for it. Having said that, I appreciate & respect your views.

If you'll allow me to briefly highlight what I'm trying to communicate:

1). Man - portable nukes (suitcase, handkerchief, Freightliner, whatever) are, in fact, real. I highlighted the W54 (60's technology) as proof of this.
2). I believe suitcase nukes, although entirely possible, are not really a weapon of choice due to technical limitations. I didn't say not possible, I said not likely.
3). The limitations include the maintenance required and the longevity of such a small amount of fissile material.
4). Although the technology is real, has been developed, there is no evidence hundreds of these devices are missing from the former USSR.
5). If, in fact, they were stolen, lost, whatever due to the technical limits mentioned above, they are essentially useless at this time.


So, in summary (mostly in complete agreement with you), man-portable nuclear devices are real. They are real. That is, they exist. Totally real. I think the practical realities of these weapons (if out there in the wrong hands) are vastly overblown.

That's it. Can you see that we agree and are not far apart at all? (You don't need to repost the definition of a man-portable special device - got it.)

-SAP
 
spookymulder said:
What I was wondering as I went through this thread has any established state ever hinted at the use of.suitcase bombs. It always seems to be about nuclear and chemical missles. Any time I've heard the subject of suitcase nukes being breached it has been via thought experiments by pundits and non state terrorist organizations. I would think that any state that wanted to cause more anxiety would at least hint at it i.e "we could f*** you up and you wouldn't even know its us" Rather they all brag about their ability to get to you via missles or air power

The fear of Suitcase bombs planted by agents may turn out to be passe .when drone technology becomes more widespread... ...or the drones will initially add another dimension to the delivery of a suitcase nuke... Even if drones can't be made "spoof proof" it certainly does add another element to an organizations arsenal, state and non-state alike.
Click to expand...

Well some high ranking russians have made mention of their deployment, but not actual use.

October 2, 1997
In these excerpts, Yablokov asserts his belief that Russian "suitcase bombs" do exist and that some of them are unaccounted for.

Testimony of Dr. Alexie Yablokov, former Science Advisor to Boris Yeltsin, before the Research And Development Subcommittee of the House National Security Committee, chaired by Representative Curt Weldon

Dr. Alexie Yablokov is the founder of the non-profit non-governmental Center for Russian Environmental Policy, currently distinguished professor and academician of the Russian Federation Academy of Sciences. He formerly chaired the Interagency Commission on Environmental Security of Russian Federation National Security Council, reporting directly to Boris Yeltsin.
Until December 1993, he was President Yeltsin's special counselor on the environment and public health. In 1991, Professor Dr. Yablokov was elected to the Supreme Soviet of the USSR and served there as deputy chair of the Committee on Ecology. From 1967 to '89, he worked as head of the laboratory at the Institute of Developmental Biology of the USSR Academy of Sciences. In 1982, he was elected a corresponding member of the USSR Academy of Sciences.
He served as chair of the USSR branch of Greenpeace from '89 to '90, and as president of the Moscow Society for the Protection of Animals from '88 to '93. Professor Yablokov's international honors include doctor honoris causa (ph), University of Brussels; Role of Honor, International Union for the Conservation of Nature, Switzerland, 1991; Science Award, American-Saudi for eco-toxicology and chemistry, 1991; and honorary member of Globe International.
He's a author of ten books, ten of which have been translated into foreign languages and five of which have been published in the United States. His many articles have attracted a great deal of attention and demonstrated using extensive scientific evidence how far the process of destruction of nature was advanced under communist rule. ...
Dr. Yablokov is truly an international figure and someone who is very highly regarded and someone who, I think, will offer some very insightful testimony today on the status of Russia's nuclear stockpile, their materials, our ability to work with Russia, and especially on the issue of small Russian devices. ...
Click to expand...
Atomic Suitcase Bombs - Testimony Of Dr. Alexie Yablokov | Russian Roulette | FRONTLINE | PBS

I raise the issue because in the case of NK i think its more likely they would try and smuggle in a portable device, than try to launch missiles at the US.
Whilst i sincerely hope to never see another of these devices used ever again, i think if the US were to suffer such a tragedy, its more likely to be via a smuggled device rather than a missile.

The reality of the MAD (mutually assured destruction) policy, makes a sneak attack more likely imo.
And if done carefully enough ie using isotopes of a signature that point to someone other than the perpetrator. Could provide the bonus of sparking a larger conflict causing even greater damage.

Since the end of the Cold War, a new nuclear weapons black
market has sprung up in Moscow, Germany, and many other European
countries. The growing black market, known to national security
experts as the 'loose nukes' problem, has grown at such an alarming
rates that it seems that just about any one can buy uranium,
plutonium, and other weapons grade material on the street. U.S.
allies, recognized nuclear states,1 and non-nuclear
powers alike worry about the possible consequences of loose nukes:
terrorist organizations like the Russian Mafia and the antifada
becoming nuclear powers or the likelihood that some of this
dangerous material being transferred to rogue states like Iran,
Iraq, or North Korea. Even if the uranium and plutonium are not
used to build nuclear technology, these materials are radioactive
and therefore intrinsically dangerous to any one who comes in
contact with them, particularly the smugglers themselves.
2. Description

A multi-million black market in nuclear materials has grown at
a frightening rate in the past several years.
Click to expand...
Nuclear Weapons Sumggling and the Environemnt

My understanding is all that can be done about this is for agents to be sent to these markets with "suitcases full of money" in order to buy up anything on offer
 
I wonder how hard it would be to manufacture millions of insect drones sensitive to nuclear material and send them out to seek out the locations of unknown "packages" and report back, just to see how slack the Russians really are. Given they have their own homegrown terrorist problem I'm sure that they're probably way more on the ball than they let on.

Any extra piece of paranoia directed at American soil serves as a cheap cold war substitute. I heard NK just tore up their peace treaty with SK. More fear and paranoia on the way. Weren't we supposed to be busy being afraid of Iran?
 
I heard on a radio debate yesterday that the nukes the Koreans have are small explosive yield high gamma ray bombs. Those are designed specifically to kill life and leave the buildings intact and it was my understanding that those kinds of weapons were banned by international treaties years ago when the USA and Russia were in the arms race. So now Korea just comes along and starts it up again and apparently has the ability to put them on ICBMs. Is there any independent verification that Korea actually has these weapons? If so, it's just plain crazy and they should be stopped now before they build an entire arsenal.

Let's add to the above that there is also now new emerging and rather scary development of Gamma ray weapons in the USA ... OMG ... "The hafnium explosive could be extremely powerful. One gram of fully charged hafnium isomer could store more energy than 50 kilograms of TNT. Miniature missiles could be made with warheads that are far more powerful than existing conventional weapons, giving massively enhanced firepower to the armed forces using them."

Gamma-ray weapons
 
Are you referring to Neutron bombs?

Neutron bomb - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hafnium - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The DPRK has been working on atomic weapons for 25 years or so. There have been three tests, the latest was the first widely believed to have actually been successful (haven't seen any yield estimates). There are many unknowns: do they (DPRK) have more fissile material? Was the test conducted under foreign state sponsorship (China)? Was the technology used stolen or local technology (both)?

I don't doubt the DPRK wishes to miniaturize their weapon. However, their idea of miniaturization is something they could fit on a ballistic missile. I believe they are many, many years from entertaining Neutron bombs, or man portable nukes. Keep in mind most buildings in the DPRK do not have any heat whatsoever. I only mention this as a piece of evidence regarding the state of overall affairs over there. Not to mention the famine. First world country, the DPRK is not.
 
Dz4Uo43226.jpg


Maybe I'm wrong, but even if North Korea ever goes past the point of sabre-rattling I can't imagine that their (admittedly massive) army of malnourished foot soldiers using old tech would be any match for a few waves of NATO's drones. They may be able to do a little damage to whoever they finally do lash out at, but would guarantee the end of their regime by doing so.

The terrorist aspect is more frightening for sure though. Even still, I can't imagine it would be terribly easy for a North Korean to travel abroad these days. I combat terrorism by not being terrified. I realize that I have a better chance of dying to a lightning strike.
 
Back
Top