Posted on 10/09/2006 7:52:09 PM PDT by blogblogginaway
GERTZ: U.S. doubts Korean test was nuclear; Readings fall short of atomic explosion... MORE...
U.S. intelligence agencies say, based on preliminary indications, that North Korea did not produce its first nuclear blast yesterday, WASHINGTON TIMES star reporter Bill Gertz is set to report in Tuesday editions.
U.S. officials, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said that seismic readings show that the conventional high explosives used to create a chain reaction in a plutonium-based device went off, but that the blast's readings were shy of a typical nuclear detonation.
'There was a seismic event that registered about 4 on the Richter scale, but it still isn't clear if it was a nuclear test. You can get that kind of seismic reading from high explosives.'
The underground explosion, which Pyongyang dubbed a historic nuclear test, is thought to have been the equivalent of several hundred tons of TNT, far short of the several thousand tons of TNT, or kilotons, that are signs of a nuclear blast, the official said. Developing...
Oh, how dare you suggest our government might be wrong and the Russians might be right! Oh, and your point about it being a legitimate test but a failure, and that they will try again... why, that's just un-American!
In all seriousness, I agree with you 100%. I sincerely hope people don't start acting like they did after the July 4th test. As fun as it might be to make fun of North Korea's failures, the failures are still a sign that they are trying to do what they promised for years and years that they were not going to do. They will eventually get it right.
So instead of a nuke test involving a primitive weapon that didn't work as well as they planned (not a big shock for a first time nuke test), you're suggesting that North Korea used an advanced non-nuclear technique that is still in the testing phase here in the US just because it wanted to fool us into thinking it had capabilities we had over 50 years ago?
Sorry, that was meant to be sent to the guy you were replying to
So instead of a nuke test involving a primitive weapon that didn't work as well as they planned (not a big shock for a first time nuke test), you're suggesting that North Korea used an advanced non-nuclear technique that is still in the testing phase here in the US just because it wanted to fool us into thinking it had capabilities we had over 50 years ago?
To add to my previous point, a Nuke has a commonly recognized signature on a seismograph. We have that here. Either it was a nuke test that didn't work as well as planned or it was an event involving a rather advanced method to produce a seismograph that looked like that of a small nuke test. I personally think the first is more likely.
Frankly, the idea it was a fake is rather silly.
They tested a nuke. Deal with it.
Now, what are we going to do about it?
.....I have very limited confidence in Gertz's sources or competence.....
I think you are correct. His sources may have been those noted here yesterday saying it wasn't nuclear. one wonders if NK has the ability to manufacture military grade explosives?
But, We should also bear in mind that there have been other very large explosions from North Korea in the not so distant past.
Il is a dud because Bush is President. Let the Democrats get in control again and North Korea will blow us up for sure.
So does this mean that there will be no sanctions?
I mean if it's not nuclear...
Maybe this whole exercise was to impress the iranians for more cash and missle tech. Might not be hard to snow turbanned mullatechs.
Maybe Il should practice hitting his woods a little more. Sounds more like a chip than a drive.
Betcha can't do that again, Nyah Nyah, Huh?, Nyah
Rove you magnificent...
They could be testing small or micro nukes....the kind terrorists would love to get their hands on.
So the question is....did they put 550 tons tnt equivalents of high explosive into the ground? Did they have only a partial implosion? Were they testing a smaller nuke with a smaller yield!
Of course it is, we had numerous 10, 20, and 50 ton yield nukes.
Now the question of it being realistic for a first device is another matter. Historically those run in the 10-40 KT range. The NKs likely got some of their designs from Pakistan, whose first was in that range. However the basic designs for the little guys are pretty available, and given that they got some help from the Kahn network, they might have tried to go that way. They do seem to have gone the plutonium route, which allows for the smaller yield weapons.
But on balance, a fizzle seems most likely.
Sounds like a dud.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.