I always sort of assumed the US has some sort of missle defense system??? I'd assume if actually attacked the defense system takes out said warhead and then the assailing country would quickly be demolished after that or am I too optimistic about our tech?

The system is there but it's unproven in real-world scenarios. When the stakes are so high, failure has catastrophic results.

Here is a thought for those of you who know more than I...

Would it be better to intercept it and the nuke to go off way up in the atmosphere, or just let it fall?

Try not to alarm the wife and kids and just hang out with them. Maybe pour a nice double of Elmer T Lee and enjoy their company.

Grab a lawn chair, sunglasses, cooler of my last beers and watch the show!

jobu93 said:

---

Try not to alarm the wife and kids and just hang out with them. Maybe pour a nice double of Elmer T Lee and enjoy their company.

---

In other words, a normal Friday night.

Would crawling into a Yeti 110 protect you from a nuclear blast?

Average Joe said:

---

I don't know that I would/could do much. That said, I have family stationed in Hawaii. I got the "I love you. Have a happy life." text shortly after the alarm. It was a little surreal at the time.

---

in light of this (and I'm sure many comparable stories), I find it completely astonishing that heads aren't rolling left and right at the Hawaii emergency management agency.

dlance said:

---

BenderRodriguez said:

---

Emp is not nearly the threat people think it is.

But it's a super easy literary device to make all the lights go out, so unrealistic emps show up a lot in books, movies and video games.

---

Might want to read the following:

http://docs.house.gov/meetings/HM/HM09/20171012/106467/HHRG-115-HM09-Wstate-PryP-20171012.pdf

---

This is a pretty frightening read. Apparently the missile defense is there, unless you want to approach from the direction where it isn't there.

BQ_90 said:

---

NK doesn't have but one or very few nukes. If they are dumb enough to launch they have to know they're dead. So they will go after city with most population, not a military target.

But they will not launch unless we invade them, isn't a death sentence if they launch first strike

---

The report linked below says we've revised that number to 60.

I doubt they have that many workable ICBMs, they may have that many nukes, but I missed the article you're talking about

powerbelly said:

---

lazuras_dc said:

---

Would crawling into a Yeti 110 protect you from a nuclear blast?

---

Sure, but then you would freeze to death

---

Just don't keep opening and closing it to get your next beer.

normaleagle05 said:

---

BQ_90 said:

---

NK doesn't have but one or very few nukes. If they are dumb enough to launch they have to know they're dead. So they will go after city with most population, not a military target.

But they will not launch unless we invade them, isn't a death sentence if they launch first strike

---

The report linked below says we've revised that number to 60.

---

Nice link!

Our missile defense systems vary in success for different types of missiles. The short range types we do fairly well but the long IBCM is predicted to be only 50% successful. Regardless of missile type we need a major ramp up of producing more of them.

It is believed that NK has quite a few short range types that could easily hit South K or Japan. But they are still working on the technology to get to the US. Also predicted they will be able to hit the US with some accuracy in the next 1-3 years.

DatTallArchitect said:

---

normaleagle05 said:

---

BQ_90 said:

---

NK doesn't have but one or very few nukes. If they are dumb enough to launch they have to know they're dead. So they will go after city with most population, not a military target.

But they will not launch unless we invade them, isn't a death sentence if they launch first strike

---

The report linked below says we've revised that number to 60.

---

Nice link!

---

He meant above. The one I originally referenced.

http://docs.house.gov/meetings/HM/HM09/20171012/106467/HHRG-115-HM09-Wstate-PryP-20171012.pdf

Quote:

---

Just six months ago, most experts thought North Korea's nuclear arsenal was primitive, some academics claiming it had as few as 6 A-Bombs. Now the intelligence community reportedly estimates North Korea has 60 nuclear weapons.

---

Abilene and Shreveport would be higher on the list than anywhere else in the "Texas region" for the same reason that DFW was super high on the list during the Cold War.

Yeah, I meant below your post I was quoting. Page two, dlance, about half way down. Go read it, it's interesting.

TexAgBolter said:

---

Abilene and Shreveport would be higher on the list than anywhere else in the "Texas region" for the same reason that DFW was super high on the list during the Cold War.

---

Agree with this to an extent. The Air Force bases in both locations would be involved in a strike against NK should they do something that stupid. The combined forces of B1's and B52's of these bases along with the B2's from Whiteman could pretty much wipeout any military force the NK may have in just one strike.

As crazy as this guy is, I doubt he is too worried about the aftermath of his actions. He is more likely to go after high profile targets like LA or NYC.

There's no chance that DFW would be a bigger target than Houston/Houston Ship Channel.

North Korea doesn't want war because they know they will lose in a bad way. They want attention in the form of some sort of negotiation to show the rest of the world they can be important players. Donald Trump, unlike every president the last 40 years, won't play like that. He taunts them but won't invite them to the table because he knows they will just break any deal we negotiate with them. Trump taunts them; they launch missile into the sea. Sooner or later the rest of the world will figure out North Korea has no intent on going to war and all that sabre rattling is just that