SUBSIM Radio Room Forums


SUBSIM: The Web's #1 BBS for all submarine and naval simulations since 1997

Go Back   SUBSIM Radio Room Forums > General > Sub & Naval Discussions: News, Books, Films, and Models
Forget password? Reset here

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-04-2020, 08:06 AM   #1
Onkel Neal
Born to Run Silent
 
Onkel Neal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 1997
Location: Cougar Trap, Texas
Posts: 18,377
Downloads: 417
Uploads: 205


radar North Korea’s Next Submarine May Make Nuclear Talks Even Harder

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...ks-even-harder

Quote:
im Jong Un has spent much of his time as North Korea’s leader developing bigger and more advanced nuclear weapons. This year, he may try to make them harder to find by putting them under the sea.

Recent North Korean reports touting a new submarine and its test of a ballistic missile designed to be launched from one have fueled speculation that a sub may be the “new strategic weapon” Kim promised to unveil this year. While such a vessel would probably be noisy and unable to stray far from the coast without being tracked, it may be enough to serve Kim’s needs.
Onkel Neal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2020, 04:10 AM   #2
Rufus Shinra
Bosun
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 66
Downloads: 14
Uploads: 0
Default

Why does anyone still believe North Korea is going to renounce its nuclear armament? For one thing, it's a pretty decent stabilizer for the region, since it makes their regime feel safer and thus less prone to idiotic behaviour. Plus, the past few decades have shown that diplomatically renouncing your deterrent is a fast way to a shallow grave, so they don't really have any incentive to do so.


As for a NK SSB, I suppose they'd try their version of a Bastion doctrine, which wouldn't be sufficient to protect that submarine from a determined effort but would make a pretty good tripwire for any attack attempt by the other side: can't start an offensive without killing the submarine first, and that will require some decent setup to do if it's in a well-protected area.
Rufus Shinra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-05-2020, 07:51 AM   #3
Onkel Neal
Born to Run Silent
 
Onkel Neal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 1997
Location: Cougar Trap, Texas
Posts: 18,377
Downloads: 417
Uploads: 205


Default

I never doubted for a minute that NK and Iran would eventually arm themselves with nukes. I've watched 4 presidents say that would never happen and do nothing to prevent it.
Onkel Neal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-06-2020, 06:20 PM   #4
Rufus Shinra
Bosun
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 66
Downloads: 14
Uploads: 0
Default

Not that there is anything more than the JCPOA that could be done. Bombing DPRK would have led to Seoul being leveled with artillery while trying to attack Iran? Well, the US should first try to actually succeed in Afghanistan before trying to attack a much larger country which is a lot more prepared and has a terrain that gives nightmares to every military planner ever. We're coming close to twenty years of continual NATO failure in Afghanistan now, just like the Soviets and the Brits before, so I don't see why anyone would think Iran would go better, particularly considering that their nuclear program is homegrown, therefore cannot be destroyed for good without either genocide or half a century of occupation - and I hope you are not suggesting genocide is a correct option.

So, yeah, diplomacy was actually working decently with Iran until someone decided they wanted to threw the agreement to the garbage bin for childish reasons.

As for DPRK or Iran having nukes? Frankly, I'm not that much bothered considering who else has them - the UNSC P5 being made of the world's foremost coup enablers, terro... sorry, freedom fighters' supporters and outright invasion planners, for example. If they do? Congrats, the rules of the game are simple, and they're called MAD. We don't attack them, they don't attack us, and I can live very well with this ruleset. If anything, nukes make countries more polite to one another, which is something direly needed.

I long for the good old times of Westphalian diplomacy, when the concept of national sovereignty still had meaning rather than 'let's sent little green men to set up a civil war and annex part of the territory' or 'let's coup a democratically elected government because they wanted to nationalize our pals' oil company'.

Hell, if we're pissed that DPRK gets nukes, then let us allow SK to get their own nukes as a reminder that invasion is not an option.
Rufus Shinra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-07-2020, 07:46 AM   #5
ikalugin
Ocean Warrior
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Moscow, Russia
Posts: 3,058
Downloads: 8
Uploads: 0


Default

ROK has a favourable military balance against DPRK even if we account for DPRK non strategic nuclear options as force multipliers. So in a sense ROK does not need nuclear weapons for warfighting or deterring an invasion.
__________________
Grumpy as always.
ikalugin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2020, 07:01 AM   #6
Rufus Shinra
Bosun
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 66
Downloads: 14
Uploads: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ikalugin View Post
ROK has a favourable military balance against DPRK even if we account for DPRK non strategic nuclear options as force multipliers. So in a sense ROK does not need nuclear weapons for warfighting or deterring an invasion.
It does not *need* them per se, but having a balance of terror makes relations much more polite and courteous altogether. I doubt many neighbours would protest much if SK acquired nuclear-tipped SRBM in a relatively transparent program (AKA if they allowed Chinese and Japanese inspections of the program to reassure both of them about the missiles' capabilities).
Rufus Shinra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2020, 01:41 PM   #7
ikalugin
Ocean Warrior
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Moscow, Russia
Posts: 3,058
Downloads: 8
Uploads: 0


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rufus Shinra View Post
It does not *need* them per se, but having a balance of terror makes relations much more polite and courteous altogether. I doubt many neighbours would protest much if SK acquired nuclear-tipped SRBM in a relatively transparent program (AKA if they allowed Chinese and Japanese inspections of the program to reassure both of them about the missiles' capabilities).

There is a balance of terror. Nuclear weapons are, well, weapons - you can achieve similar effects through other means.
__________________
Grumpy as always.
ikalugin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2020, 03:33 PM   #8
Jeff-Groves
Village Idiot
 
Jeff-Groves's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Nevada, Ohio
Posts: 2,432
Downloads: 51
Uploads: 0


Default

I'd think they'd be better served to do cheap drones that projected a bigger threat.
__________________
privateer, Madox58, Jeff-Groves? Same crazy person.
Doing the same crazy stuff. Now you know.
Jeff-Groves is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2020, 03:55 AM   #9
Rufus Shinra
Bosun
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Posts: 66
Downloads: 14
Uploads: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ikalugin View Post
There is a balance of terror. Nuclear weapons are, well, weapons - you can achieve similar effects through other means.
Not as effectively or cheaply.
Rufus Shinra is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2020, 08:39 AM   #10
ikalugin
Ocean Warrior
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Moscow, Russia
Posts: 3,058
Downloads: 8
Uploads: 0


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rufus Shinra View Post
Not as effectively or cheaply.

Yet ROK is significantly stronger conventionally for such a balance to exist. And this is not the first time - think of 1940s (and to lesser extend in 1960s) when USSR either didn't have nuclear weapons or was at a significant disadvantage.


Yet through the conventional advantage in Europe the balance has been maintained.
__________________
Grumpy as always.
ikalugin is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
north korea

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:17 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 1995- 2020 Subsim