North Korea claims to have conducted hydrogen bomb test

[jar_e]

http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/05/asia/n...ent/index.html

North Korea says it has successfully carried out a hydrogen bomb test in a region of the country where it conducted three previous nuclear tests.

A televised North Korean statement confirmed the test was a hydrogen bomb test in an area northeast of the reclusive country.

The test took place at 10 a.m. local time, the regime said in a televised statement.

The seismic event, which measured the event at a magnitude of 5.1, occurred 19 kilometers (12 miles) east-northeast of Sungjibaegam, the United States Geological Survey said.

[Looch City]

Obligatory:

[nik-]

hmm, I'm pretty skeptical it was a hydrogen bomb. Three years from 1 kiloton to 4 kiloton and then four years from that 4 kiloton to 7 kiloton. Now we're supposed to buy 3 years from 7kt to a two stage device, typically hitting megatons?

Nope.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by jar_e

http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/05/asia/n...ent/index.html

One would think at some point in time China would decide that these whack jobs were actually more of a threat to Bejing than Washington and wipe them out.

One can only hope.

[Slava]

One guy on twitter (who knows a lot more than I understand) says it is likely a fission bomb and not hydrogen, and probably "boosted" with tritium.

[Ducay]

Likely a hydrogen bomb.....Chem 20 style

[nik-]

boosted fission would make a lot more sense than fusion for sure

[nik-]

this could also be what they're doing as well (obviously which a much lower yield)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_4

Sub megaton, 80-85% of the power from fission and the remainder from fusion

[Crumpy-Gunt]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

One would think at some point in time China would decide that these whack jobs were actually more of a threat to Bejing than Washington and wipe them out.

One can only hope.

Ah the good old wipe them out idea. Let us all join in prayer, asking God to hasten the Chinese in wiping out every man woman and child in North Korea.. If only world politics were that easy.

Why should we in the west, or the enlightened nations, get to choose who should have WMD and who shouldn't, or more accurately who we trust with WMD and who we don't? In fact over a million Iraqis were killed for exactly this purpose. Then we found out they didn't have any.

It's like a modern witch hunt in a way. They've got nukes, we don't trust them - get them! But wait - we've got nukes, and they don't trust us.

It's the worst kept secret in the world that Israel has nuclear weapons, just ask Mordechai Venunu.. Pakistan. India.

To me it's kind of funny, in a strange way. It's like the sheriff going around deciding who is mature and smart enough to have a weapon that could destroy entire cities and countries indeed. In my opinion NOBODY should have these weapons. Not just our allies.

But obviously there are some who believe they are entitled to WMD and other nations aren't.

But then you get a problem. If you are right next to a country with a WMD, you are definitely not going to feel safe until you have one. So China got one, then India had to have one because of China. Then guess what..Pakistan had to have one because of India. This is only natural.

I'm not for anybody having these weapons. The issue for me is why can't we agree that these weapons shouldn't exist and why don't the nations who have these weapons actually hold fast to the plan to get rid of them?

My guess is that is causes tension, which in turn sells weapons, which in turn makes money. Profit over peace.

[nik-]

I think the idea is that they don't want any more nations to have nuclear weapons. You may find it hypocritical, but that doesn't mean it's not a good idea.

[Huntingwhale]

Sure ya did NK...sure ya did.

[Locke]

Frankly I'm more surprised that they didnt blow themselves up.

[Huntingwhale]

Originally Posted by Crumpy-Gunt

I'm not for anybody having these weapons. The issue for me is why can't we agree that these weapons shouldn't exist and why don't the nations who have these weapons actually hold fast to the plan to get rid of them?

My guess is that is causes tension, which in turn sells weapons, which in turn makes money. Profit over peace.

Mutually assured destruction.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutual...ed_destruction

It is based on the theory of deterrence, which holds that the threat of using strong weapons against the enemy prevents the enemy's use of those same weapons. The strategy is a form of Nash equilibrium in which neither side, once armed, has any incentive to initiate a conflict or to disarm.

[Crumpy-Gunt]

Originally Posted by nik-

I think the idea is that they don't want any more nations to have nuclear weapons. You may find it hypocritical, but that doesn't mean it's not a good idea.

It's not that I find it hypocritical. It is.

I can have this but you can't.

I am a stripper but my daughter won't be.

It's not that I find it to be a bad idea it is a bad idea.

It's a bad idea for anyone to have weapons that can bomb us back to the Stone Age, destroying every painstaking incremental development in human history.

I would be against my mother having nukes. And she's a sweet lady who wouldn't hurt a soul.

[Crumpy-Gunt]

The Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, commonly known as the Non-Proliferation Treaty or NPT, is an international treaty whose objective is to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons and weapons technology, to promote cooperation in the peaceful uses of nuclear energy, and to further the goal of achieving nuclear disarmament and general and complete disarmament.

The point isn't simply making sure no new nations get WMD. The point is NUCLEAR DISARMAMENT. Not sitting around telling people they can and can't join the WMD having nations.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trea...uclear_Weapons

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by Crumpy-Gunt

Ah the good old wipe them out idea. Let us all join in prayer, asking God to hasten the Chinese in wiping out every man woman and child in North Korea.. If only world politics were that easy.

Why should we in the west, or the enlightened nations, get to choose who should have WMD and who shouldn't, or more accurately who we trust with WMD and who we don't? In fact over a million Iraqis were killed for exactly this purpose. Then we found out they didn't have any.

It's like a modern witch hunt in a way. They've got nukes, we don't trust them - get them! But wait - we've got nukes, and they don't trust us.

It's the worst kept secret in the world that Israel has nuclear weapons, just ask Mordechai Venunu.. Pakistan. India.

To me it's kind of funny, in a strange way. It's like the sheriff going around deciding who is mature and smart enough to have a weapon that could destroy entire cities and countries indeed. In my opinion NOBODY should have these weapons. Not just our allies.

But obviously there are some who believe they are entitled to WMD and other nations aren't.

But then you get a problem. If you are right next to a country with a WMD, you are definitely not going to feel safe until you have one. So China got one, then India had to have one because of China. Then guess what..Pakistan had to have one because of India. This is only natural.

I'm not for anybody having these weapons. The issue for me is why can't we agree that these weapons shouldn't exist and why don't the nations who have these weapons actually hold fast to the plan to get rid of them?

My guess is that is causes tension, which in turn sells weapons, which in turn makes money. Profit over peace.

I'm not suggesting all of N Korea, just the dumb #######s that are in charge, hell just pick someone in the second tier of absurdly large green hats and back them in a coup. The CIA will happily teach them how to do it.

[blankall]

They're lying.

It still hasn't been proven that North Korea has nukes. They may have just strapped some nuclear waste to a bunch of dynamite. I'm serious about that theory. If you believe this you believe that the Kim-Jong family are the pudgiest group of super athletes the world has ever seen.

[Crumpy-Gunt]

There you have it, a little bit of knowledge on any topic is dangerous. The "idea" isn't that no more nations can acquire these weapons. That's part 1 of the "idea". It was never meant to keep USA and USSR as the only WMD bearing nations in the world.

It was also meant to ensure the technology is used peacefully, with an eventual goal of destroying every last WMD before it is ever used.

What a beautiful "idea"

[nik-]

Originally Posted by Crumpy-Gunt

It's not that I find it hypocritical. It is.

I can have this but you can't.

I am a stripper but my daughter won't be.

It's not that I find it to be a bad idea it is a bad idea.

It's a bad idea for anyone to have weapons that can bomb us back to the Stone Age, destroying every painstaking incremental development in human history. Not all of those signatories are hypocritical.

I would be against my mother having nukes. And she's a sweet lady who wouldn't hurt a soul.

Yeah, but it doesn't matter that it's hypocritical. It's still a good idea to prevent any more countries from having them. There's a reason the NPT exists and that countries that don't have them signed it.

Obviously it's a bad idea that anyone has them, but it's too late. Idealism won't help anyone, it's about realism.

[DuffMan]

Originally Posted by Crumpy-Gunt

.

What a beautiful "idea"

Lol, love the username, this is the first I've seen it.