1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

Response To North Korean Nuclear Attack

Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by nc-1701, Feb 12, 2007.

?

What Is Your Response?

  1. Complete strategic nuclear retaliation level eveything including civillian targets

    31.3%
  2. Immediate nuclear retaliation against military targets folowed by an invasion

    31.3%
  3. Immediate conventional strike folowed by invasion

    20.5%
  4. Wait 24-48 hours while you gather a coalition to launch a combined conventional invasion

    7.2%
  5. Go to the UN and request a resolution condemning their action folowed by UN sanctioned regime change

    1.2%
  6. Heed Kim's warning and leave him alone

    8.4%
  1. IglooDude

    IglooDude Enforcing Rule 34 Retired Moderator Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2003
    Messages:
    22,094
    Location:
    Igloo, New Hampshire
    I'm also operating under the assumption that our ballistic missile defense shield missed the first shot for unknown reasons but presumably would have a shot at intercepting subsequent inbounds, and also our Aegis cruiser/destroyer stationed in the Sea of Japan would now be alerted, ready to take the ICBMs down in the booster stage, and might be joined by its friends momentarily. Also joined by the fact that North Korea might be bluffing in any case, and even if they aren't they've probably shot their best missile first and remaining ones might be less reliable than the first one.

    Anyway, in your scenario the implication is that if the US holds back, NK won't launch again. Thus, minutes don't necessarily count - you can wait for the missile defenses to go to maximum readiness, for AWACS to launch and start giving local radar coverage, for fighter cover to scramble, and for Aegis ships to go to general quarters.
     
  2. nc-1701

    nc-1701 bombombedum

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2005
    Messages:
    4,025
    Location:
    America
    Simple doctrine would be an immediate counterstrike certainly within an hour bombers/missiles would be headed on their attak runs. As for the intel I'm sure that right now we have a pre-planned set of targets. So that the minute POTUS authorizes a counter attack we simply initiate plan 139 or whatever I'm sure we maintain a log of where every known ICBM of any nation is at any time. In short we wouldn't have to consult or plan anything we would already have a map drawn up with all of his known bases/military facilities it would just be a matter of pressing the button, or turning the key. The key to remember when it comes to nuclear war is that speed is what matters so everything has been planned beforehand I'm sure we have the co-ordinates of even France's nuke readily programmed so we can knock them out as quickly as possible. Basicaly w would simply folow a pre-written script.
     
  3. amadeus

    amadeus As seen on OT

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2001
    Messages:
    34,057
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Osaka (大阪)
    Fourth option.

    Mobilize the armed services and invade after consulting with the ROK President.

    Declare war against any state that agrees to support or supply North Korea with any military or dual-use equipment.
     
  4. nc-1701

    nc-1701 bombombedum

    Joined:
    Oct 28, 2005
    Messages:
    4,025
    Location:
    America
    Wow, I never thought I'de see you advocating restraint while I was advocating nuclear retaliation...:crazyeye: :eek:
     
  5. amadeus

    amadeus As seen on OT

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2001
    Messages:
    34,057
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Osaka (大阪)
    As tempting as total nuclear annihilation is, it doesn't serve our long-term strategic goals in East Asia.
     
  6. Bozo Erectus

    Bozo Erectus Master Baker

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2003
    Messages:
    22,389
    Agreed, but what Im saying is that in a nuclear situation, one in which we've already been struck, you dont hope we know everything and everythings going to be ok, like we did with Iraq. IMO you just dont have that luxury in the immediate aftermath of a nuclear strike on US soil.
    Would they? Thats just an assumption. We know theyd go on maximum alert thats for sure, but in those heady first few minutes and hours, would they be sure of who there friends were in the coming conflagration? They might see it as a 'use em or lose em' situation. We just dont know.

    Why not? If we didnt, it would be a massive failure of everything we've been doing for the past 60 years developing our nuclear capabilities.
    Planes? This isnt Dr Strangeglove, our missiles would be over their targets within minutes.
    Theyre also pretty quick too launch.
    Bozo agrees with Turner, but President Erectus and President Turner would have the duty to make sure, absolutely sure, that not one more missile strikes American soil, and to do so as quickly as possible without hesitation. Safety first, mercy later.
    Thats an avalanche of assumptions, and for all of the reasons Ive cited above, in a nuclear war involving ICBMs, the only safe assumption to make is that the enemy has more missiles and will strike again at any moment.
    You mean NC-1701s scenario? If I recall his OP correctly, he says that NK claims that they wont attack again if we dont retaliate. Does it seem plausible to you as President to say, "Oh, wait! Kim said he wouldnt strike again? Well why didnt ya say so! The guy who just took out Seattle wouldnt lie to us, would he?"

    Nope, I do not concur Captain. In a nuclear war, the least thing you have is time to sit around waiting for things. Thats why a guy follows the President everywhere with the nuclear football.
     
  7. Bozo Erectus

    Bozo Erectus Master Baker

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2003
    Messages:
    22,389
    How does a restrained retaliation fit in with our long term goal of survival? Worrying about our policies in East Asia while in the midst of a nuclear war is just as nonsensical as NCs plan to focus on public relations.
     
  8. CCA

    CCA Emperor

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2003
    Messages:
    1,449
    I would turn the other cheek....
    And promptly be booted out of office by a military junta
     
  9. IglooDude

    IglooDude Enforcing Rule 34 Retired Moderator Supporter

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2003
    Messages:
    22,094
    Location:
    Igloo, New Hampshire
    Logic indicates that he'd fire off all his missiles at once, rather than firing one and waiting a bit for us to get our act together. Sure, he may be acting illogically (it is Kim Jong Il we're talking about, after all), but waiting fifteen minutes for verification that it WAS an NK missile, and that the signature of the warhead indicates a NK-produced bomb would be nice. I personally would not eliminate a few million NK civilians and some substantial number of Japanese civilians (downwind radioactivity) over something I'm not positive about.

    The reason that guy follows the President is so that we can launch our ICBMs (and strategic strike aircraft) before they're destroyed on/in the ground by the inbound nukes. If the USSR had launched on us and Mr Nuclear Football Briefcase was needed, it wouldn't be because we had a hope in hell of eliminating any Soviet strategic weapons pre-launch. Obviously, NK is incapable of destroying even a significant percentage of our strategic arms, so that sort of urgency is gone.
     
  10. DaveShack

    DaveShack Inventor Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2003
    Messages:
    13,108
    Location:
    Arizona, USA (it's a dry heat)
    Assuming the launch sites are known, a counterforce strike would be the optimum response to minimize risk to additional Americans. Conventional if targets are sufficiently soft, but don't hesitate to go with dial-a-yield nukes on the minimum effective setting for the situation.

    This is a scenario they brief the President-elect on as soon as we know who it is. In fact, it's possible both candidates may receive that briefing even before the election.
     

Share This Page