• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Terrifying new nuclear threat is here

American

American

Trump Grump Whisperer
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Mar 11, 2006
Messages
96,114
Reaction score
33,449
Location
SE Virginia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Terrifying new nuclear threat is here | Fox News

The Air Force is integrating the B61 Mod 12 nuclear weapon into the F-35 this year as part of a long-range plan to deploy a nuclear-armed, dual-capable F-35 able to give commanders a wider envelope of precision nuclear attack options.




“Detailed risk reduction activities have been completed ensuring the F-35A is fully compatible with the B61-12 weapon. Planning for Block 4 nuclear certification efforts have begun in anticipation of initial B61-12 integration on the F-35A this year,” Maj. Emily Grabowski, Air Force Spokeswoman, told Warrior Maven.
The Block 4 F-35, to fully emerge in the next decade, contains more than 50 technical adjustments to the aircraft designed as software and hardware builds -- to be added in six-month increments between April 2019 to October 2024, she added.
Click to expand...

Small yield nuclear options; I think they want NK to get a message.
 
I think this is more likely a response to Putin's announced intention to deploy tactical nukes, and has little to do with NK.
 
American said:
Terrifying new nuclear threat is here | Fox News



Small yield nuclear options; I think they want NK to get a message.
Click to expand...

Ah yes, tactical nuclear weapons. And who decides when to use them? What rank would you have to have? I'm sure Trump would love to be involved in tactical decisions but that doesn't sound like an efficient way to respond in battle conditions.
Given the American propensity for friendly-fire incidents, it might be hard to convince an ally to join you in a campaign.
 
humbolt said:
I think this is more likely a response to Putin's announced intention to deploy tactical nukes, and has little to do with NK.
Click to expand...

Bingo
 
Lord Tammerlain said:
I think NK knows that if they use Nukes they are gone. I am sure the US and SK knows that if NK is attacked they will use nukes

I doubt smaller nukes are going to send much of a different message to NK than large nukes already do
Click to expand...

It's not as much about nukes is if the demonstrate the ability to successfully enter the envelope necessary to attack the USA, then it's game on nukes or no nukes as we have no way to determine what is on that missile until it hits.
 
iguanaman said:
China has reiterated their intention to support N. Korea should we attack it without cause. Do you think they are bluffing? Do ya... punk?
Click to expand...

And China has also clearly stated that if North Korea is the attacking party, they are going to sit the entire thing out, even if it mean destruction of NK and reunification.

In other words, they will honor their treaty with NK, but they are also tired of their sabre rattling.

All it may take is another Battle of Yeonpyeong, or Bombardment of Yeonpyeong. Like the 2 hour long bombardment in 2010. Even the PRC condemned NK for that attack in the strongest possible terms.

If such an incident was to happen again, odds are China would see that as NK starting the conflict, and simply sit back and watch.
 
Oozlefinch said:
And China has also clearly stated that if North Korea is the attacking party, they are going to sit the entire thing out, even if it mean destruction of NK and reunification.

In other words, they will honor their treaty with NK, but they are also tired of their sabre rattling.

All it may take is another Battle of Yeonpyeong, or Bombardment of Yeonpyeong. Like the 2 hour long bombardment in 2010. Even the PRC condemned NK for that attack in the strongest possible terms.

If such an incident was to happen again, odds are China would see that as NK starting the conflict, and simply sit back and watch.
Click to expand...

OK. So given Trump's bellicose tweets, how likely is it that N. Korea will give us an excuse to invade them today? I think they will behave and China will continue to supply them with their needs. Putin has also shown that he will help them too. Trump bungled this badly like the wannabe novice he is. Did you get your coin yet?
 
Oozlefinch said:
Like in 2010?
Click to expand...

They didn't have Trump breathing down their neck then did they. They will just continue to advance the nuclear capabilities like they did with every other President only this time they have a willing participant in their propaganda. Tweets for everyone.
 
American said:
Terrifying new nuclear threat is here | Fox News



Small yield nuclear options; I think they want NK to get a message.
Click to expand...

American:

A first-strike weapon and therefore extremely destabilising and dangerous.

If the US military was going to use nukes in reprisal for a North Korean or other state's nuclear strike somewhere in the world, then I surmise low yield weapons would be of low priority, as sending an overwhelming and terrific message to all potential nuclear armed rivals and to the whole world would be the flawed priority of such an attack. This deployment of low-yield nuclear weapons for pin-point tactical use would then indicate the intention of the US military and the US state to conduct nuclear first strikes against potential foes rather than to deter the use of nukes and thus only serves to incentivise states to go nuclear in a vain bid to intimidate the US from making such a choice.

If you're mad enough to initiate a nuclear war with another nuclear-armed state, then you must also, out of necessity, be insane enough to do so overwhelmingly, in the remote hope that you can so utterly destroy a rival state and all of its nuclear armed allies simultaneously that they cannot effectively retaliate with their own nuclear weapons. That is the reason these low-yield weapons increase the possibility of human extinction or near extinction rather then improving our odds for survival. Effective nuclear deterrence requires universal and abject fear on all sides from initiating nuclear strikes and triggering MAD in order to work.

Cheers?
Evilroddy.
 
Oozlefinch said:
Only the Commander in Chief can make that decision, nobody else.
Click to expand...

Well, the report cited said it would give commanders more scope.

"The Air Force is integrating the B61 Mod 12 nuclear weapon into the F-35 this year as part of a long-range plan to deploy a nuclear-armed, dual-capable F-35 able to give commanders a wider envelope of precision nuclear attack options."

That implies someone several pay grades below President.
 
Evilroddy said:
American:

A first-strike weapon and therefore extremely destabilising and dangerous.

If the US military was going to use nukes in reprisal for a North Korean or other state's nuclear strike somewhere in the world, then I surmise low yield weapons would be of low priority, as sending an overwhelming and terrific message to all potential nuclear armed rivals and to the whole world would be the flawed priority of such an attack. This deployment of low-yield nuclear weapons for pin-point tactical use would then indicate the intention of the US military and the US state to conduct nuclear first strikes against potential foes rather than to deter the use of nukes and thus only serves to incentivise states to go nuclear in a vain bid to intimidate the US from making such a choice.

If you're mad enough to initiate a nuclear war with another nuclear-armed state, then you must also, out of necessity, be insane enough to do so overwhelmingly, in the remote hope that you can so utterly destroy a rival state and all of its nuclear armed allies simultaneously that they cannot effectively retaliate with their own nuclear weapons. That is the reason these low-yield weapons increase the possibility of human extinction or near extinction rather then improving our odds for survival. Effective nuclear deterrence requires universal and abject fear on all sides from initiating nuclear strikes and triggering MAD in order to work.

Cheers?
Evilroddy.
Click to expand...

Wow, you really think you know your stuff.
 
Lord Tammerlain said:
I think NK knows that if they use Nukes they are gone. I am sure the US and SK knows that if NK is attacked they will use nukes

I doubt smaller nukes are going to send much of a different message to NK than large nukes already do
Click to expand...

Maybe, but it's not NK that we give a **** about. It's for China.
 
iguanaman said:
I think they want to make Armageddon more likely. Won't that please Trumps evangelist base? China has reiterated their intention to support N. Korea should we attack it without cause. Do you think they are bluffing? Do ya... punk?
Click to expand...

Who says we have to attack first? You....punk?
 
American said:
Who says we have to attack first? You....punk?
Click to expand...

There's no realistic scenario where North Korea uses a nuke offensively and ends up thinking it was a good idea. The same is true of China (and even Russia, to a lesser extent.)

They are only valuable to them as a deterrent.

The U.S. is presently the only nation equipped to use nuclear weapons offensively against any major nation on earth with any chance of escaping reprisal strikes.
 
The B-61 mod. 12 is an old-design, variable-yield H-bomb, significantly upgraded and reinforced to be a ground-penetrating bomb and fitted with a GPS guided tail fin system. When you bury a nuclear weapon into the ground and then detonate it you get a very dirty bomb producing lots of radioactive material which is thrown up into the atmosphere, spread over the surrounding land and which gets into the water system and any nearby sea waters. These modified B-61s, if used as a first strike weapon, will poison North Korea, South Korea and possibly Chinese and Russian territory with nuclear fallout. That would likely draw both China and Russia into the military conflict on the peninsula and risks escalation to thermo-nuclear war. Is such a war winnable? I think, no. Such a pre-emptive strategy is reckless brinksmanship which threatens the whole human population's continued existence.

Cheers.
Evilroddy.
 
Grand Mal said:
Well, the report cited said it would give commanders more scope.

"The Air Force is integrating the B61 Mod 12 nuclear weapon into the F-35 this year as part of a long-range plan to deploy a nuclear-armed, dual-capable F-35 able to give commanders a wider envelope of precision nuclear attack options."

That implies someone several pay grades below President.
Click to expand...
Of course not. Those field commanders would need the previous order from the Commander-in-Chief to deploy these weapons. With this order being issued, then and only then they would be allowed to make tactical determination regarding how and where to use them. But the initial green light would have to come from the POTUS.

Nobody below the president's pay grade is allowed to make the independent decision to initiate the use of the American nuclear arsenal, regardless of the size and scope of the nuclear bombs being deployed. This doesn't change because these weapons have a more limited yield.
 
Lord Tammerlain said:
Then why did you specifically say NK in your OP instead of China?
Click to expand...

I should have included China. I think the discussion of nuke size is more for China. Just a personal opinion.
 
American said:
Terrifying new nuclear threat is here | Fox News



Small yield nuclear options; I think they want NK to get a message.
Click to expand...

Why would they send an f-35 with nukes? The f-35 has pitiful range compared to bombers, and having refuelers in air means more tagrets for esay picking. Most american and russian decicated bombers can fly long distances, up to nearly around the world before refueling, adding this to an f-35 is a joke, they do not have the range to ever use them.

Fyi tactical nukes are nothing new, neither are micro nukes, the smallest us made nuke was barely bigger than the moab explosion, russia has the foab which is more powerful than the moab and a thermobaric bomb more than twice as powerful as americas smallest nuke. So the tiny nuke game is not new by any means, however the original thought was mad did not apply to micro nukes, the world reversed their thoughts on that including america, but now we want to repeat what we knew was a failure.
 
Grand Mal said:
Well, the report cited said it would give commanders more scope.

"The Air Force is integrating the B61 Mod 12 nuclear weapon into the F-35 this year as part of a long-range plan to deploy a nuclear-armed, dual-capable F-35 able to give commanders a wider envelope of precision nuclear attack options."

That implies someone several pay grades below President.
Click to expand...

Wrong.

It gives them more options in planning potential attacks, but only the President can authorize their use.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom