US Intel Indicates North Korea Now Has Everything It Needs To Nuke The US

[Guest shiloh357]

A confidential Central Intelligence Agency assessment of North Korea’s re-entry vehicles indicates the country has what it needs to carry out a nuclear strike on the continental U.S., sources knowledgable about the report told The Diplomat.

North Korea conducted its second test of the Hwasong-14 intercontinental ballistic missile in late July, and while the CIA assesses that the re-entry vehicle did not survive the lofted test, it assumes that the re-entry vehicle would perform properly if the missile were fired along a normal trajectory, the sources with direct knowledge of the assessment told The Diplomat.

The CIA assesses that the lofted trajectory put additional stress on the re-entry vehicle, causing it to fail during testing, but believes that the technology would probably not encounter performance problems on a minimum energy trajectory.

The U.S. has sought comfort and a sense of security by denying that North Korea could produce an ICBM, by refusing to accept that North Korea could miniaturize a nuclear warhead, and by consistently highlighting North Korea’s inability to develop a functional re-entry vehicle.

But the latest report indicates the U.S. is running out of excuses to downplay the North Korean nuclear threat.

The Hwasong-14 ICBM is believed to have a range that puts most of the continental U.S. within striking distance, according to leading experts. The Defense Intelligence Agency is certain that North Korea now has the ability to mount nuclear warheads on its ballistic missiles, including its ICBMs, and now, the CIA is largely convinced that the North has a re-entry vehicle.

North Korea is emerging as a nuclear-armed state with the ability to threaten its neighbors and the U.S. with missiles armed with nuclear warheads. The North has achieved what many observers thought was beyond them, and ahead of schedule.

From here, the North will likely continue to advance its missile capabilities.

It is unclear how these developments factor into President Donald Trump’s war of words with North Korea, which announced earlier this week that it intends to conduct new weapons testing in which it fires missiles along standard trajectories.

Trump warned North Korea Friday that the U.S. military is “locked and loaded” for an assault on North Korea if necessary, promising that Kim Jong-un “will regret it” if he chooses to fire on the U.S. or its allies in Asia.

So far, the U.S. has vastly underestimated North Korea, both in its determination and its capabilities.

 

http://dailycaller.com/2017/08/11/report-us-intel-indicates-north-korea-now-has-everything-it-needs-to-nuke-the-us/

[Running Gator]

Is this the same Intel that said Iraq's WMDs were a threat to the US?

 

[walla299]

1 hour ago, Running Gator said:

Is this the same Intel that said Iraq's WMDs were a threat to the US?

 

Darn. You beat me to it. I was thinking the same thing.

[other one]

2 hours ago, Running Gator said:

Is this the same Intel that said Iraq's WMDs were a threat to the US?

 

It grieves me to no end to agree....  but I do.   Bush bought it, let's see if Trump follows.

[Guest shiloh357]

14 hours ago, Running Gator said:

Is this the same Intel that said Iraq's WMDs were a threat to the US?

 

No, and at least they are not  dumbing everything down to "trash talk."

[Steve_S]

23 hours ago, Running Gator said:

Is this the same Intel that said Iraq's WMDs were a threat to the US?

 

Do you think the intel is incorrect? Just from what is in the public sphere, recorded nuclear weapons tests (through seismography, etc.) and missile tests (reported by multiple intelligence agencies across the world), it would seem that the underlying premises behind the intel are far, far more reliable than the intel on iraq. The question is, if the intel is accurate, what do you think should be done?

[Running Gator]

49 minutes ago, Steve_S said:

Do you think the intel is incorrect? Just from what is in the public sphere, recorded nuclear weapons tests (through seismography, etc.) and missile tests (reported by multiple intelligence agencies across the world), it would seem that the underlying premises behind the intel are far, far more reliable than the intel on iraq. The question is, if the intel is accurate, what do you think should be done?

I am skeptical, it is one thing to carry out local test, but very different to send a missile half way around the world.

I am not sure we can do more than what has been done via the UN, finally getting Russia and China to agree to sanctions.

For the US there may not be a winning move.  In the cult classic movie "War Games" the conclusion is the only way to win is to not play the game.

NK is well aware of what we are capable of, there is no need to engage in a war of trash talk, in fact that is a game we can never win

[SavedByGrace1981]

On 8/12/2017 at 1:49 PM, Running Gator said:

Is this the same Intel that said Iraq's WMDs were a threat to the US?

 

You don't think the WMD's ended up in Syria?

Blessings,

-Ed

[Running Gator]

3 minutes ago, SavedByGrace1981 said:

You don't think the WMD's ended up in Syria?

Blessings,

-Ed

I do not think whatever little bit of WMD's made it to Syria were ever a threat to the US.  

During the lead up to the war we were lead to believe that there was an imminent threat, that there was a major WMD program taking place under our very eyes.   

It was all lies. 

[Steve_S]

4 hours ago, Running Gator said:

I am skeptical, it is one thing to carry out local test, but very different to send a missile half way around the world.

I am not sure we can do more than what has been done via the UN, finally getting Russia and China to agree to sanctions.

For the US there may not be a winning move.  In the cult classic movie "War Games" the conclusion is the only way to win is to not play the game.

NK is well aware of what we are capable of, there is no need to engage in a war of trash talk, in fact that is a game we can never win

I think the only real question at this point is minaturization. The physics involved are fairly well open and settled insofar as the tests of the missiles themselves go. The last test had an apogee of 2300 miles at a very highly lofted trajectory. That would make it physically capable of 5500-6000 miles at a more optimal trajectory. The RV supposedly broke up on reentry, but most seem to think that's because of the severity of the trajectory and that it would likely have survived a more traditional course that a ballistic missile would take at a longer range (though, that's an estimate and nothing more).

As far as the rhetoric goes, I won't defend that from the US side, but, the man was elected by the people to represent us and that is his chosen way of doing so. I can say for sure that it is not shocking to me, at least.

I think that it's fair to say at this point that even if they don't have a functional ICBM with a functional warhead (and they might already), they almost certainly will in the near term (probably 6 months to three years and I'd say three years would be by far the most conservative estimate you'd find from even the most skeptical section of experts who have been looking at the data). At this point, to me, it's simply a question of whether or not we are willing to live with them having them. For a long time my instinct was to say that the guy is blustering, he's trying to force lifting of the sanctions, etc., and he may be.

The concern that I have, growing in the back of my mind, is with regards to scale and scope. There is nothing preventing them from building 50 missiles, 100 missiles, 500 missiles, etc. They don't have the typical checks and balances that even other more totalitarian states have. They simply don't seem to care about their economy, don't seem to care about any sort of public opinion, don't care about potential consequences from foreign nations, even china or russia. Many of the things that would hamper a country such as this from building a large nuclear arsenal simply does not come into play with North Korea. What if it comes to the point where they build enough missiles (enough to feel assured that they can defeat our ABM shield) that they feel comfortable in issuing a true ultimatum?  We may find ourselves in a position where either catering to the demands of a dictator or preemptive nuclear strike are the only two options to avoid an attack. I don't think this is a highly likely scenario, but it is also not a scenario that I would place anywhere near as low as 0 percent. I, for one, do not want to be in a position where a conflict with north korea turns into a zero sum game. They have basically dumped immeasurable resources into their various nuclear weapons programs over the past 15-20 years. I see no reason to assume that they are going to stop at 20-30 servicable missiles once they reach their goal of production line quality ballistics munitions. Mutually assured destruction with the soviet union, as bad as that was (and still is with russia, in a way) was a whole different ball game than it would be with north korea, if they were able to get there.