Slashdot Mirror

Excuse me, but you don't know what the fuck you're talking about.

First, some background. I doubt nukes will be used against the artillery aimed at Seoul, because only two North Korean artillery systems can actually reach Seoul from the DMZ - the 170mm Koksan and the 300mm rocket artillery. And the 170mm can only range some of Seoul. The rockets are also better for delivering chemical weapons, so they'll be the primary concern.

Fortunately these emplacements (500 or so, if targeting the long-range systems threatening Seoul) can be effectively engaged by a plethora of conventional firepower, and a goodly fraction of that deliverable via artillery (thus, almost instantly available as counter-battery fire.) DPRK weapons are dug into protected shelters called HARTs, meaning their locations are fixed, and known. Constructed bunkers will be proofed against shells of up to 203mm (8-inch) and ones dug into mountains or natural caves will be even sturdier. Fortunately, no matter how tough the bunker, they still need a "window" to fire out of, which must be a few feet wide and tall to allow the gun to train on targets (windage and elevation.) This is well within the accuracy margins of weapons like the M31 guided rocket, fired by the MLARS ("the 70km sniper rifle") or laser-guided anti-tank munitions, like the 155mm Copperhead shell, or GPS guided shells like the Excalibur. These weapons will handily penetrate any blast doors over said portals as well, since those will be far less sturdy than several feet of granite rock. Additionally, there's the Small Diameter Bomb, a small, standoff (60 nautical mile) GPS guided glide bomb that can penetrate up to three feet of reinforced concrete, or the Tomahawk missile, which has a penetrating warhead variant (TTPV,) and has been successfully employed against bunkers and caves in Afghanistan many times. These weapons in particular are available in mass quantity - the USS Michigan carries 154 of them alone. When you factor in other considerations - like the empirically demonstrated 25% dud rate of DPRK artillery shells and the questionable ROF sustainable by under-trained, underfed gun crews, as well as the overwhelming reconnaissance advantage enjoyed by allied forces (which will have drones overhead to laser-designate targets for pinpoint strikes,) it's clear that the military is not boasting when they say they can attack the DPRK without serious harm befalling Seoul.

The real problem is the DPRK's Short Range Ballistic Missile force (SRBM,) they have an estimated 100-200 TELs, and something on the order of 200 actual missiles. I'm prone to believe it's something like 100 TELs (Transporter Erector Launchers, the trucks that elevate and fire the missiles,) with a single reload for each. The DPRK has around 28 missile bases, (according to Janes,) which are essentially drive-in tunnel/bunkers to house their TELs safe from attack. These bunkers may welll be impregnable to anything but the 30,000 pound Massive Ordinance Penetrator, of which we've only a few. Fortunately, we needn't destroy the bunkers - we simply need to blow up the tunnel entrances, sealing the TELs inside where they cannot fire. This can be done with much lighter munitions; the usual bunker-busting bombs, but it greatly multiplies the number of targets. Assuming an average of eight tunnel entrances at each missile base, that's 228 targets to hit. This is doable, especially with the ability to sortie B-24s and B-1B bombers from America to make intercontinental attacks, carrying 12-24 JASSM bunker-penetrating stealth cruise missiles apiece. However, war planners might want much greater assurances that enough TELs will be wiped out to ensure SRBM attacks cannot penetrate the Anti-Ballistic Missile defenses of the ROK an

This claim has been debunked for years: http://nautilus.org/napsnet/na...

North Korea in no way has the capability to "destroy" Seoul with conventional artillery.

millions of civilians die

Millions would not die. The death toll of a surprise barrage by NK conventional artillery would be tens of thousands. Long range NK artillery would be neutralized in the first week. Seoul would survive.

You're parroting the claims of the NYT and others that tend to exaggerate the consequences of conflict for their own misguided reasons. Without nuclear or chemical weapons NK cannot destroy Seoul, and with such weapons they face rapid obliteration by the strategic weapons of South Korean allies.

AC thats about all it is about. A mil and gov version of the US style Ag gag laws https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... to stop public comment on mil spending and shield no bid mil contractors from press comment.

The mentioned list is:
Epidemiology, the almost total lack of advance medical containment for patients per state and reduction in agricultural inspections thanks free trade deals.
Biotechnology: quarantine laws are been removed to allow more international trade deals. No talk in the press, no reports of new outbreaks due to policy changes so the policy is good if no reports are made.
The quantum computer aspect, quantum computers, signal processing is trying to secure dual use mil and civilian communications networks. Every mil base is basically connected to wide open civilian communications networks built by random global contractors. The hope is quantum computers will allow for effortless secure mil communications over the same public and international networks. A huge risk for any military to have to trust civilian communications networks rather than its own networks. A lot of domestic spending on quantum computers will try to solve the lack of any telco network design.
Defence to invest over AU$5b in cyber and IT to rectify under-investment (February 25, 2016)
http://www.zdnet.com/article/d...
Satellite sharing and a lack of secure satellite systems is another long term issue that should have been fixed but never was. Some vital mil satellite systems are shared with a few other nations, their govs, mil and contractors :)
Fault-tolerant systems dont exist and never got designed in. The less the wider public and press knows about that the better for the political class. No real fuel reserve policy, a very basic communications backup system.
Australia nearly completely dependent on imported fuel (24 February 2014)
http://www.abc.net.au/radionat... Image processing is basically what generations of staff learned from the "NRO" during staff trips. A huge amount of skilled staff could spot Soviet 1960-80's equipment thanks to US sharing :) A new generation of staff are trying to learn more eg Torus multi-beam antenna, infrared systems.
The Pine Gap project
http://nautilus.org/briefing-b...
Robotics is basically drone work and AI for drones. Nothing unique that any other advanced nation can work on given the same levels of funding.

This is a non-trivial problem that people who say "just wipe out NK" don't fully appreciate. Seoul is a city of over 10million less than 50 miles from the DMZ and is within range of thousands of conventional artillery pieces. Unless there is an incredibly coordinated plan, wiping out North Korea will probably mean sacrificing Seoul at the very least.

Thoroughly debunked. http://nautilus.org/napsnet/napsnet-special-reports/mind-the-gap-between-rhetoric-and-reality/#axzz2PjxGYDxd

Posting anon to preserve moderation:
Hecker is one of the few people who is able to talk authoritatively about the country's nuclear program. He is very pragmatic about the situation and manages to minimize his personal political bias. If anyone is serious about North Korea's weapons program, they should definitely give the above video an attentive watch. There is an excellent article from Hecker about his return trip to North Korea located here, freely available for all.

If I understand correctly the situation in China, the main reason why the Chinese people let the Communists in power is their double digit yearly economic growth.

I'm not sure I agree with the phrase "let the Communists [stay] in power". At the end of the Cold War it seemed like the Communists would lose power in China just like in Eastern Europe. Vast student demonstrations took place in Beijing during Gorbachev's visit, similar to the ones in Europe that brought down communist governments in a couple of months. The difference was that the Chinese government managed to find soldiers willing to put crush the demonstrations later.

It was only after this that the Chinese Communist Party abandoned the communist economic system for a version of fundamentalist capitalism. They kept their monopoly on power though. The rapid growth is somewhat misleading - it only applies in cities and only along the eastern provinces of China, not in the vast rural heartland. There China is still extremely poor. Corrupt local party official regularly level bogus taxes in a way reminiscent of gangsters charging protection money. There are regular 'Mass Incidents', the Chinese governments term for abortive uprisings.

http://www.nautilus.org/fora/security/08065YuYu.html

Recently, a series of mass incidents took place in China. These incidents demonstrate some of the social conflicts within China. First there was the "Weng'an Incident" on June 28, 2008. During this event a police station and a county government office building in Guizhou province were assaulted and torched by the local populace. The chaos started in Weng'an County when people who were dissatisfied with the investigation into the death of a local student gathered at the county government offices and the public security bureau. While officials were handling the case, some people unfamiliar with the exact context of the event surrounded the police station and the office buildings of the county government and Communist Party Committee. The protesters smashed and torched many offices and some cars. The chaos lasted for seven hours and involved thousands of people.[1]

Second was the "Fugu Incident" on July 3. A driver of a farm vehicle in Fugu, Shanxi jumped into the Yellow River to avoid being checked for traffic violations by the police. Local authorities fished his body out of the river two days later, and were then pursued by angry kin of the dead man, who demanded to know why they were not told of the discovery of the body and demanded to have control of the corpse. The two sides struggled over the body, which attracted many spectators and evolved into a clash between villagers and the police.[2]

Third, the "Huizhou Incident" on July 16. During this incident more than 100 people attacked police officers over the controversial death of a motorcycle driver in Huizhou, Guangdong. The driver's family members said that he was beaten to death by the security guards of Shangnan Village, but local police were told that he died from a traffic accident. The unrest lasted from early morning to 1 pm. Seven members of the group, which had also overturned a police wagon and raided a police station, were arrested.[3]

Fourth was the "Menglian Incident". On July 19, rubber farmers attacked police who had been sent to arrest alleged instigators in a conflict with rubber plant managers in Menglian, Yunnan. Forty officers were injured and eight police vehicles were burned during the conflict and two farmers were shot dead by riot police.

The numbers of Mass Incidents have been growing for years, even when the economy was booming. Taiwan's Mainland Affairs Council, thinks that

http://www.mac.gov.tw/english/english/macpolicy/risk961228.htm

Statistics have shown that the number of mass incidents in Chinaâ"including t