[C19fan]

I think a nuke on a Nork submarine would be more a first strike weapon because if a shooting war starts that sub would be sunk within 5 minutes by a US SSN keeping an eye on it.

[E. Pluribus Unum]

What could go wrong?

[logi_cal869]

An NK ‘first strike’ better occur before ‘16, because it would be suicide.

That stated, it’s a waste of time (missile tubes) for that purpose: A sub is a perfect delivery system if the intent is the prior...

[Logical me]

Not sure how America would combat. King Obama has weakened our defense so bad that a couple nukes that might get threw would throw Americans in such a confusion they would run for the toilet instead of fight. Have little faith in the intelligence level of millions of Americans.

[SampleMan]

The NORK midget subs aren’t that easy to find. That said, they are also totally incapable of launching a ballistic missile or conducting operations in the open sea. They are ambush and SOF vehicles. What they might be able to do is a suicide mission with the device as a integral part of the sub. Drive it into a harbor and detonate.

Frankly, I don’t think the NORKS have the technical ability to put a ballistic missile on any submarine, let alone their Romeos. Better odds that it sinks to the bottom when launched than that it completes a single patrol.

[Vendome]

Not even realistic.

[terycarl]

I can’t imagine getting aboard a submarine built by slave labor in North Korea......maybe they give each sailor a can of that tarry spray stuff that you see on T.V. that stops even a leak in the side of a pail.....