| Submit your comments on this article |
| Korea |
| U.S. decision to repeal "law banning smaller nukes" under fire |
| 2003-05-28 |
| The U.S. Senate recently decided to repeal the "law banning smaller nukes" that was adopted and took effect in l993, according to a news report. In accordance with this decision, the U.S. Department of Defense was tasked to work out a plan to develop, manufacture and use smaller nukes such as underground-penetrating smaller nukes and start full-scale research into them. "Underground" is, I believe, Kimmie's new address. This decision discloses a dastardly move of the bush administration to carry out the reckless war strategy to dominate the world by force of arms. Operation Engulf and Devour continues, led by the Evil Bush and his lackeys. The issue of developing smaller nukes is nothing new as it has long been clamoured for by the hawkish hardliners of pentagon. But the recent decision of the senate arouses profound concern of the world public as it lifted the legal ban on such nukes so that they may be developed in real earnest. The Senate? They must've thought they had some friends there. They sound disappointed. It is said that the destructive power of an underground-penetrating smaller nuke which the U.S. plans to develop is equivalent to one third of that of the a bomb dropped over Hiroshima late in World War II as its trotyl equivalent is less than 5kt and it is capable of destroying any underground structure 300m deep. So we can assume Kimmie is less then 300m down and that's why they're pissed. "Ding-dong... Nuclear JDAM calling!" Dig 'em deeper, Dear Leader. It is as clear as noonday that the U.S. production of such type of weapon is aimed to maintain an unchallenged edge over other nuclear weapons states and dominate the world. This will only escalate the worldwide nuclear arms race and prompt various countries to pull out of the NPT. ...like they're doing. What arouses the caution of the DPRK is the U.S. assertion that the development of smaller nukes is necessary for striking "rogue states" and terrorist organizations. ...and they're on that list. Right near the top. What is more serious is that the development of such type of nuke is resumed at a time when the U.S. is increasing its pressure on the DPRK over such non-existent issues as drug trafficking and counterfeit money while blustering that "further steps would be considered in case the danger increases" and "all options are not taken off the table". Let's nuke one of the white slag express boats. Maybe they'll get the message. The U.S. nuclear threat compels the DPRK to heighten its revolutionary vigilance and build a deterrent force to counter the use of nukes. The DPRK has its own effective method to retaliate against it. The People's Army and the people of the DPRK remain unfazed in face of the U.S. undisguised threat of nuclear attack as they have consolidated the country's defences as an impregnable fortress with the might of the Songun policy. They are fully determined to increase the might of singlehearted unity. Unfortunately, most of our good stuff is less then 300m down. It's in the Songun policy book under "Impregnable Fortresses: Digging". The U.S. is well advised to stop acting rashly, well aware that the DPRK has its own effective method to cope with Washington's nuclear threat. Yessssss. Ve have our vays of dealing vith the evil Amelicans...ahahahahahahahahaha. |
| Posted by:tu3031 |
| #11 Howe about sending a mason's hoddie for"block stretcher".I actually told a hoddie that and he took-off at a run.Crew boss had to chase him down. |
| Posted by: Raptor 2003-05-29 08:44:36 |
| #10 Snicker, the nuke hand grenade joke is almost as old as sending a new airmen to supply for a roll of flight line. To the contrary, Steve. I'm ex-service, and a former professional gunsmith, with my hobby being weapons research. To the best of my personal knowledge, the smallest nuclear weapon the Western nations are able to build is the so-called "Tennis-ball" bomb. It's called that because the original design was intended to be roughly the size of a standard can of tennis balls. It's very inefficient, in terms of the bang you get for the ammount of fissile material, but it IS a nuke, and it DOES give you a rather impressive bang for its size and weight. Going for a slightly larger size, there's the (currently out of service) "Davey Crockett" bomb. President Kennedy once witnessed a demonstration of this system, a description of which can be found here. HTTP://www.brook.edu/FP/projects/nucwcost/davyc.HTM If you go up one directory, there's an excellent website detailing a number of "backpack" or smaller nukes from various programs. Here's the link. HTTP://www.ncoic.com/nukelink.htm So, yeah, nuclear grenades are a real potential/threat, Steve. Tends to make life nowadays rather interesting. Ed Becerra |
| Posted by: Ed Becerra 2003-05-28 17:03:36 |
| #9 Snicker, the nuke hand grenade joke is almost as old as sending a new airmen to supply for a roll of flight line. |
| Posted by: Steve 2003-05-28 14:05:37 |
| #8 OK, we have the delivery system problem solved, now all we have to do is to creat a small weapon system that will fissle and not fizzle, and we've got it! |
| Posted by: Anonymous 2003-05-28 13:02:16 |
| #7 That makes much more sense to me now. Thanks for the clarification. |
| Posted by: Mike N. 2003-05-28 12:29:49 |
| #6 Actually, Mike, you wouldn't need a strong throwing arm. All you would need is the M-203 (or the older M-79) 40mm grenade launcher. They have a launch range of just over 400 yards. So a nuclear grenade would work, you just wouldn't want to throw it by hand. ^_^ Ed. |
| Posted by: Ed Becerra 2003-05-28 12:15:50 |
| #5 "in-situ vitrification" is one of the methods of dealing with polluted soils... |
| Posted by: Dishman 2003-05-28 11:13:42 |
| #4 The heat alone would vitrify the soil (turn it into glass). They'd have a hell of a time digging him out... |
| Posted by: Ptah 2003-05-28 11:04:43 |
| #3 Increasing the pressure and resulting "voices" in Kimmy's little head...heh heh. Even if you didn't destroy the little bastard's "lair", how long to dig him out (and would anyone? "hey! the dirt's glowing!") and how long would the air, food, water last? A stone coffin |
| Posted by: Frank G 2003-05-28 10:07:20 |
| #2 Steve, Unless the tosser had one helluvan arm, I'm afraid that might include the person that threw it also. |
| Posted by: Mike N. 2003-05-28 09:52:57 |
| #1 Maybe we can finally get that nuclear hand grenade I've heard so much about. You know, the one that will destroy everything within a 100 foot radius. |
| Posted by: Steve 2003-05-28 09:20:31 |