What's new

North Korea Just Displayed Enough ICBMs to Overwhelm America’s Defences

Abid123

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
Jan 1, 2021
Messages
2,829
Reaction score
-8
Country
Pakistan
Location
Norway
During a military parade commemorating the 75th anniversary of the founding of the Korean People’s Army (KPA), the official name of North Korea’s armed forces, an unprecedentedly large arsenal of intercontinental range ballistic missiles (ICBMs) displayed as an apparent show of force aimed at the United States. Pyongyang and Washington have been officially at war for 73 years, with the successful development of multiple classes of ICBM, and of miniaturised thermonuclear warheads to arm them being a leading achievement of the past decade and providing the only means for launching major retaliatory strikes should the U.S. Military launch an attack on Korean territory. 12 launchers for latest ICBM class, the Hwasong-17, were driven through Kim Il Sung Square in central Pyongyang during the celebrations, with experts widely reporting afterwards that this arsenal would be sufficient to overwhelm the U.S. mainland’s missile defences - aside from the KPA’s deployments of other ICBM classes. The Ground Based Midcourse Defence system protecting the United States has long been relied on as a defence against possible Korean strikes, with the KPA being the only body to field an arsenal aimed at America - but small enough that there was thought to be a realistic chance of interception. The GMD deploys only 44 anti ICBM interceptors, with three considered necessary to reliably neutralise each incoming warhead - although use of decoys and other countermeasures could disrupt this. With each Hwasong-17 at conservative estimates carrying four independently targetable reentry vehicles, meaning a total of 48 vehicles for the arsenal seen in Kim Il Sung Square, the GMD system will be overwhelmed should all be fired.

article_63e6338f06d4b0_92934829.jpeg

Anti Ballistic Missile From American GDM System

North Korea accelerated production of miniaturised warheads and ICBMs in 2018, with estimates for the number of warheads varying widely from around 60 to well over 100. A New Years address on January 1 2023 announced the initiation of “an exponential increase of the country’s nuclear arsenal” would be the “main orientation” of KPA modernisation efforts in that year. Satellite footage from mid 2020 accordingly showed steps towards construction of a new nuclear reactor which could facilitate a major expansion in the production of fissile materials for the nuclear arsenal and allow it to be expanded more quickly. In parallel to enlargement of its nuclear arsenal, the KPA has also invested in making its delivery vehicles less vulnerable to interception by American and allied air defences. This has included development of solid fuelled missiles with shorter launch cycles for both tactical and strategic uses, making them much more difficult to destroy on the ground, as well as missiles with semi ballistic depressed trajectories which have proven impossible for the American AEGIS defence system to even detect when tested. The country also began flight testing of hypersonic glide vehicles in September 2021 for medium range ballistic missiles, with the possibility that as a next step such glide vehicles could be integrated onto ICBMs.

article_63e6374a017f79_12016530.jpeg

Test Launch of Hwasong-17 ICBM

The ability to strike the American mainland is highly valued by Pyongyang, largely due to the influence of the historical memory of the Korean War, during which Korean population centres were successively erased from the map by American firebombing raids while the KPA lacked any means of retaliation. An estimated 20-30 percent of North Korea’s population died in the three year conflict with the U.S., which saw Washington come close on multiple occasions to launching nuclear attacks which were widely advocated for by figures in the leadership. The U.S. came close to launching attacks subsequently under the Johnson, Nixon, Clinton, Obama and Trump administrations, with the last in 2017 having seriously considered initiating mass nuclear strikes that were expected to kill millions of Koreans across the country. Successful development of nuclear-tipped ICBMs by the KPA, first demonstrated in 2017, was considered key to taking American military options off the table.

Source: https://militarywatchmagazine.com/article/nkorea-icbms-overwhelm-america
 
.
During a military parade commemorating the 75th anniversary of the founding of the Korean People’s Army (KPA), the official name of North Korea’s armed forces, an unprecedentedly large arsenal of intercontinental range ballistic missiles (ICBMs) displayed as an apparent show of force aimed at the United States. Pyongyang and Washington have been officially at war for 73 years, with the successful development of multiple classes of ICBM, and of miniaturised thermonuclear warheads to arm them being a leading achievement of the past decade and providing the only means for launching major retaliatory strikes should the U.S. Military launch an attack on Korean territory. 12 launchers for latest ICBM class, the Hwasong-17, were driven through Kim Il Sung Square in central Pyongyang during the celebrations, with experts widely reporting afterwards that this arsenal would be sufficient to overwhelm the U.S. mainland’s missile defences - aside from the KPA’s deployments of other ICBM classes. The Ground Based Midcourse Defence system protecting the United States has long been relied on as a defence against possible Korean strikes, with the KPA being the only body to field an arsenal aimed at America - but small enough that there was thought to be a realistic chance of interception. The GMD deploys only 44 anti ICBM interceptors, with three considered necessary to reliably neutralise each incoming warhead - although use of decoys and other countermeasures could disrupt this. With each Hwasong-17 at conservative estimates carrying four independently targetable reentry vehicles, meaning a total of 48 vehicles for the arsenal seen in Kim Il Sung Square, the GMD system will be overwhelmed should all be fired.

article_63e6338f06d4b0_92934829.jpeg

Anti Ballistic Missile From American GDM System

North Korea accelerated production of miniaturised warheads and ICBMs in 2018, with estimates for the number of warheads varying widely from around 60 to well over 100. A New Years address on January 1 2023 announced the initiation of “an exponential increase of the country’s nuclear arsenal” would be the “main orientation” of KPA modernisation efforts in that year. Satellite footage from mid 2020 accordingly showed steps towards construction of a new nuclear reactor which could facilitate a major expansion in the production of fissile materials for the nuclear arsenal and allow it to be expanded more quickly. In parallel to enlargement of its nuclear arsenal, the KPA has also invested in making its delivery vehicles less vulnerable to interception by American and allied air defences. This has included development of solid fuelled missiles with shorter launch cycles for both tactical and strategic uses, making them much more difficult to destroy on the ground, as well as missiles with semi ballistic depressed trajectories which have proven impossible for the American AEGIS defence system to even detect when tested. The country also began flight testing of hypersonic glide vehicles in September 2021 for medium range ballistic missiles, with the possibility that as a next step such glide vehicles could be integrated onto ICBMs.

article_63e6374a017f79_12016530.jpeg

Test Launch of Hwasong-17 ICBM

The ability to strike the American mainland is highly valued by Pyongyang, largely due to the influence of the historical memory of the Korean War, during which Korean population centres were successively erased from the map by American firebombing raids while the KPA lacked any means of retaliation. An estimated 20-30 percent of North Korea’s population died in the three year conflict with the U.S., which saw Washington come close on multiple occasions to launching nuclear attacks which were widely advocated for by figures in the leadership. The U.S. came close to launching attacks subsequently under the Johnson, Nixon, Clinton, Obama and Trump administrations, with the last in 2017 having seriously considered initiating mass nuclear strikes that were expected to kill millions of Koreans across the country. Successful development of nuclear-tipped ICBMs by the KPA, first demonstrated in 2017, was considered key to taking American military options off the table.

Source: https://militarywatchmagazine.com/article/nkorea-icbms-overwhelm-america

Who is behind the ballistic missile and ICBM program of North Korea and their nuclear program too? I know that most experts agree that this is the work of Russia and China but to what degree and which of Russia or China, is aiding North Korea more? I expect that to be China and from what I recall this is also the case.

On the other hand the Chinese gained their nuclear and missile tech from the Soviets. Or they stole it or whatever it was.

Does anyone here have some sources/material about this topic that one can read? It is quite fascinating to put it mildly.

Fair play to North Korea for going "all in" and not ending up like Gaddafi, Saddam etc.
 
.
During a military parade commemorating the 75th anniversary of the founding of the Korean People’s Army (KPA), the official name of North Korea’s armed forces, an unprecedentedly large arsenal of intercontinental range ballistic missiles (ICBMs) displayed as an apparent show of force aimed at the United States. Pyongyang and Washington have been officially at war for 73 years, with the successful development of multiple classes of ICBM, and of miniaturised thermonuclear warheads to arm them being a leading achievement of the past decade and providing the only means for launching major retaliatory strikes should the U.S. Military launch an attack on Korean territory. 12 launchers for latest ICBM class, the Hwasong-17, were driven through Kim Il Sung Square in central Pyongyang during the celebrations, with experts widely reporting afterwards that this arsenal would be sufficient to overwhelm the U.S. mainland’s missile defences - aside from the KPA’s deployments of other ICBM classes. The Ground Based Midcourse Defence system protecting the United States has long been relied on as a defence against possible Korean strikes, with the KPA being the only body to field an arsenal aimed at America - but small enough that there was thought to be a realistic chance of interception. The GMD deploys only 44 anti ICBM interceptors, with three considered necessary to reliably neutralise each incoming warhead - although use of decoys and other countermeasures could disrupt this. With each Hwasong-17 at conservative estimates carrying four independently targetable reentry vehicles, meaning a total of 48 vehicles for the arsenal seen in Kim Il Sung Square, the GMD system will be overwhelmed should all be fired.

article_63e6338f06d4b0_92934829.jpeg

Anti Ballistic Missile From American GDM System

North Korea accelerated production of miniaturised warheads and ICBMs in 2018, with estimates for the number of warheads varying widely from around 60 to well over 100. A New Years address on January 1 2023 announced the initiation of “an exponential increase of the country’s nuclear arsenal” would be the “main orientation” of KPA modernisation efforts in that year. Satellite footage from mid 2020 accordingly showed steps towards construction of a new nuclear reactor which could facilitate a major expansion in the production of fissile materials for the nuclear arsenal and allow it to be expanded more quickly. In parallel to enlargement of its nuclear arsenal, the KPA has also invested in making its delivery vehicles less vulnerable to interception by American and allied air defences. This has included development of solid fuelled missiles with shorter launch cycles for both tactical and strategic uses, making them much more difficult to destroy on the ground, as well as missiles with semi ballistic depressed trajectories which have proven impossible for the American AEGIS defence system to even detect when tested. The country also began flight testing of hypersonic glide vehicles in September 2021 for medium range ballistic missiles, with the possibility that as a next step such glide vehicles could be integrated onto ICBMs.

article_63e6374a017f79_12016530.jpeg

Test Launch of Hwasong-17 ICBM

The ability to strike the American mainland is highly valued by Pyongyang, largely due to the influence of the historical memory of the Korean War, during which Korean population centres were successively erased from the map by American firebombing raids while the KPA lacked any means of retaliation. An estimated 20-30 percent of North Korea’s population died in the three year conflict with the U.S., which saw Washington come close on multiple occasions to launching nuclear attacks which were widely advocated for by figures in the leadership. The U.S. came close to launching attacks subsequently under the Johnson, Nixon, Clinton, Obama and Trump administrations, with the last in 2017 having seriously considered initiating mass nuclear strikes that were expected to kill millions of Koreans across the country. Successful development of nuclear-tipped ICBMs by the KPA, first demonstrated in 2017, was considered key to taking American military options off the table.

Source: https://militarywatchmagazine.com/article/nkorea-icbms-overwhelm-america
That truck looks commercial
 
.
Who is behind the ballistic missile and ICBM program of North Korea and their nuclear program too? I know that most experts agree that this is the work of Russia and China but to what degree and which of Russia or China, is aiding North Korea more? I expect that to be China and from what I recall this is also the case.

On the other hand the Chinese gained their nuclear and missile tech from the Soviets. Or they stole it or whatever it was.

Does anyone here have some sources/material about this topic that one can read? It is quite fascinating to put it mildly.

Fair play to North Korea for going "all in" and not ending up like Gaddafi, Saddam etc.
Norbert Brugge is probably one of the better sources when it comes to the dprk missile programs.
http://www.b14643.de/Spacerockets/Specials/North-Korea/index.htm
http://www.b14643.de/Spacerockets/Specials/index.htm
Gallery.jpg
 
.
Norbert Brugge is probably one of the better sources when it comes to the dprk missile programs.
http://www.b14643.de/Spacerockets/Specials/North-Korea/index.htm
http://www.b14643.de/Spacerockets/Specials/index.htm
Gallery.jpg
Thanks.

Most experts also claim that most Iranian missiles are based on North Korean ones. Makes sense given the documented and close relations between those two post-1979.

Ironically the Saudi Arabians are themselves getting/have got access to similar ballistic missile tech just courtesy of the Chinese.

Even funnier, from what I recall much of the Soviet/Russian missile tech was delivered to the Soviet Union thanks to Nazi German POV's (captured missile engineers etc.) and of course later expanded on. Not much different from NASA/the US/Manhattan Project = tons of German scientists - ironically many of them Jewish Germans that escaped the Nazis.

Funny little world.:laugh: I guess that once the jinn is out of the bottle (technology in this case) it starts to proliferate.
 
.
The ability to strike the American mainland is highly valued by Pyongyang, largely due to the influence of the historical memory of the Korean War, during which Korean population centres were successively erased from the map by American firebombing raids while the KPA lacked any means of retaliation. An estimated 20-30 percent of North Korea’s population died in the three year conflict with the U.S., which saw Washington come close on multiple occasions to launching nuclear attacks which were widely advocated for by figures in the leadership. The U.S. came close to launching attacks subsequently under the Johnson, Nixon, Clinton, Obama and Trump administrations, with the last in 2017 having seriously considered initiating mass nuclear strikes that were expected to kill millions of Koreans across the country. Successful development of nuclear-tipped ICBMs by the KPA, first demonstrated in 2017, was considered key to taking American military options off the table.

Source: https://militarywatchmagazine.com/article/nkorea-icbms-overwhelm-america

That bold part alone is enough for any nation to seek out a nuclear arms program to protect their population—the indiscriminate firebombing of entire cities and starving people to death. The weaker nations need weapons to deliver an equivalent means of damage.

North Korea would also be within its legal right to exact revenge for the deaths suffered.

The intelligent thing is they were first to see Libya, Iraq and others what happened when they abandoned their nuclear programs; they are now dysfunctional societies with no hopes of recovery. There not as stupid to abandon these weapons as they know they will be next on the chopping block.
 
. . . .
Since I was invited here from '09, this is the nth time I seen how NKR is more powerful than the US.
No where in the article does it say that NK is more powerful than US. Do you have reading comprehension? I don't blame you, you are getting quite old.

I don't like to talk in this manner/tone but if you are here only to troll you will get a straight answer.
 
. .
Who is behind the ballistic missile and ICBM program of North Korea and their nuclear program too? I know that most experts agree that this is the work of Russia and China but to what degree and which of Russia or China, is aiding North Korea more? I expect that to be China and from what I recall this is also the case.

On the other hand the Chinese gained their nuclear and missile tech from the Soviets. Or they stole it or whatever it was.

Does anyone here have some sources/material about this topic that one can read? It is quite fascinating to put it mildly.

Fair play to North Korea for going "all in" and not ending up like Gaddafi, Saddam etc.

You know nothing between Soviets and China. Although Soviets did provide help to China in the initial stage missile and nuclear development programs, they quickly withdraw the assistance to China along with blueprints taking away after the two countries broke off in late 1950s. So Soviet help was not that significant and anyway decisive in Chinese development of nukes and missiles. Did you hear the famous Chinese "two bombs and one satellite" program that developed Chinese nukes, missiles and satellites. With Soviet initial help, China pretty much developed nukes, missiles and space tech on its own. Where do you get the idea that China stole Soviet nuke and missile tech, from delusional China hater Indians ? As you can see, the Chinese series of rockets that are closely related to Chinese missiles are totaly different from those of Russia today.
 
Last edited:
.
You know nothing between Soviet and China. Although Soviet did provide some help to China in the very initial stage missile and nuclear development programs, they quickly withdraw the assistance to China after the two countries broke off in late 1950s. So Soviet help was not that significant and anyway decisive in Chinese development of nukes and missiles. Did you hear the Chinses "two bullets one satellite" program that developed Chinese nukes, missiles and satellites. China pretty much developed nukes, missiles and space tech on its own. Where do you get the idea that China stole Soviet nuke and missile tech, from delusional China hater Indians ? As you can see, the Chinese series of rockets that are closely related to Chinese missiles are totaly different from those of Russia today.

Same as the claim that most Iranian missiles are based on North Korean ones. There was some Korean assistance when Iran was inaugurating her ballistic missile program. Then their respective efforts took different paths. It's been decades since Iran has stopped relying on outside input in BM development. A side by side look at Iranian and Korean missile inventories will already give one an idea of this. If cooperation continued, it was definitely bi-directional because Iran caught up very fast in missile technology. So the suggestion that Iranian missiles are derived from Korean models is baseless.
 
Last edited:
.
So, should Afghanistan develop nuclear weapons to counter Pakistan?

Sure, had they had it before the Russians invaded, they'd still be civilized. And we wouldn't have needed to manage a thousand groups, each with its own political ideology.
 
.
Sure, had they had it before the Russians invaded, they'd still be civilized. And we wouldn't have needed to manage a thousand groups, each with its own political ideology.
Afghanistan even beginning to develop nuclear weapons should be immediately nuked
 
.
Back
Top Bottom