« Unacceptable? Too Late.
What can we do about North Korea? »

North Korean Nuke Test A Dud?

By Justin Gardner | Related entries in Foreign Policy, The War On Terrorism, The World

Defense Tech takes a look at the numbers:

3.58-3.7 gives you a couple hundred tons (not kilotons), which is pretty close in this business unless you’re really math positive. The same equation, given the US estimate of 4.2, yields (pun intended) around a kiloton.

A plutonium device should produce a yield in the range of the 20 kilotons, like the one we dropped on Nagasaki. No one has ever dudded their first test of a simple fission device. North Korean nuclear scientists are now officially the worst ever.

Of course, I want to see what the US IC says. If/when the test vents, we could have some radionuclide data — maybe in the next 72 hours or so.

But, from the initial data, I’d say someone with no workable nuclear weapons (Kim Jong Il, I am looking at you) should be crapping his pants right now.

Well, let’s hope.

Meanwhile, on the right-wing…


This entry was posted on Monday, October 9th, 2006 and is filed under Foreign Policy, The War On Terrorism, The World. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

3 Responses to “North Korean Nuke Test A Dud?”

  1. Bob J Young Says:
    October 9th, 2006 at 5:33 pm

    Funny!
    ICBM’s that accidentally blow up, and Fission devises that fizzle.
    I guess I can stop digging that bomb shelter.

  2. Alan Stewart Carl Says:
    October 9th, 2006 at 6:04 pm

    I like the right-wing piece you linked to. The “North Korea is all Clinton’s fault” meme has been brewing since the moment Bush took office. Bush’s allies knew/know NK is an insanely difficult foreign relations task and rather than have their man take the heat for NK’s inevitable development of The Bomb, the right wingers have been spreading the “blame Clinton” lines for 6 years. Gotta love politics.

  3. David Says:
    October 9th, 2006 at 7:57 pm

    There’s lots to blame about both administrations, IMO. I think that Clinton had more freedom of action, and chose the least-confrontational option, when a more confrontational option might have been less painful overall. However, I can see why he would have done that.

Leave a Reply


NOTE TO COMMENTERS:


You must ALWAYS fill in the two word CAPTCHA below to submit a comment. And if this is your first time commenting on Donklephant, it will be held in a moderation queue for approval. Please don't resubmit the same comment a couple times. We'll get around to moderating it soon enough.


Also, sometimes even if you've commented before, it may still get placed in a moderation queue and/or sent to the spam folder. If it's just in moderation queue, it'll be published, but it may be deleted if it lands in the spam folder. My apologies if this happens but there are some keywords that push it into the spam folder.


One last note, we will not tolerate comments that disparage people based on age, sex, handicap, race, color, sexual orientation, national origin or ancestry. We reserve the right to delete these comments and ban the people who make them from ever commenting here again.


Thanks for understanding and have a pleasurable commenting experience.


Related Posts: