Soooo of kim is assassinated it's automatic nuke?

[justoffal]

This is an odd development. What happens if somebody.... Anybody just randomly offs the
Guy?

 

[OhPleaseJustQuit]

This is an odd development. What happens if somebody.... Anybody just randomly offs the
Guy?

.

"Reportedly".



.

 

[Eman623]

I'm sure the NoKo's already had a plan in place to start lobbing nukes if the country was attacked and Fatboy was killed.

 

[airplanemechanic]

There is enough nuclear power sitting under the ocean surface off the coast of NK that if fatboy decides to lob nukes at us NK will be glass within 10 minutes. Each one of these can carry up to 8 individual MIRV's. Each warhead is 1.2mega tons. That's about 100 times more than Hiroshima, for EACH warhead, and each missile has 8. Each sub carries 26 missiles. Do the math.

 

[MarathonMike]

What if Tubbo is assassinated by a North Korean? Are they gonna nuke themselves?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

There is enough nuclear power sitting under the ocean surface off the coast of NK that if fatboy decides to lob nukes at us NK will be glass within 10 minutes.

Doesn't have to be off the coast. Our SLBMs can hit them pierside from the states if needed.

 

[airplanemechanic]

What if Tubbo is assassinated by a North Korean? Are they gonna nuke themselves?

With what shall they assassinate him? A tub of rice?

 

[airplanemechanic]

Doesn't have to be off the coast. Our SLBMs can hit them pierside from the states if needed.

Yes but they're sitting off of the NK coast for this reason. That's why I said 10 min, not 30.

 

[Zincwarrior]

With what shall they assassinate him? A tub of rice?

A tomahawk. This is just publicly stating that if the US pulls an Iran then there is automatic retaliation.

 

[justoffal]

What if Tubbo is assassinated by a North Korean? Are they gonna nuke themselves?

Exactly

 

[airplanemechanic]

A tomahawk. This is just publicly stating that if the US pulls an Iran then there is automatic retaliation.

And let's America know that if something happens to this fat blob with bad hair it will be time to nuke NK off the map.

 

[Zincwarrior]

And let's America know that if something happens to this fat blob with bad hair it will be time to nuke NK off the map.

You say it like its a bad thing.

 

[airplanemechanic]

You say it like its a bad thing.

I don't want to nuke anyone but knowing ahead of time that they will launch means Aegis can prepare and we can ready our subs for a massive and final nuclear assault.

 

[justoffal]

And let's America know that if something happens to this fat blob with bad hair it will be time to nuke NK off the map.

I think if NK was about to launch a nuke we would suddenly see an invasion of Chinese soldiers and elite security forces wipe out the command and control of North Korea long before they could get anything done.

 

[22lcidw]

North Korea is not defending much of anything.

 

[Zavulon]

There is enough nuclear power sitting under the ocean surface off the coast of NK that if fatboy decides to lob nukes at us NK will be glass within 10 minutes. Each one of these can carry up to 8 individual MIRV's. Each warhead is 1.2mega tons. That's about 100 times more than Hiroshima, for EACH warhead, and each missile has 8. Each sub carries 26 missiles. Do the math.

It's simply not true. Even W88 warhead is only 455 kt, there are still only twenty missiles per submarine deployed, and in usual situation there can't be ten warheads per missile.

But what is the real message, that a player of Minimal Deterrence says, is: "We do understand that your counter-attack might virtually totally annihilate us, that's why we are going to use it only to deter you, to prevent your attack on our very existence. You can kill us, but you'll suffer losses of more than 1 mln civilians. That's why you shouldn't attack us without very serious reasons, and we are going to be pretty cautious to not give you those serious reasons, because we are not suiciders."

 

[airplanemechanic]

It's simply not true. Even W88 warhead is only 455 kt, there are still only twenty missiles per submarine deployed, and in usual situation there can't be ten warheads per missile.

View attachment 1254866


But what is the real message, that a player of Minimal Deterrence says, is: "We do understand that your counter-attack might virtually totally annihilate us, that's why we are going to use it only to deter you, to prevent your attack on our very existence. You can kill us, but you'll suffer losses of more than 1 mln civilians. That's why you shouldn't attack us without very serious reasons, and we are going to be pretty cautious to not give you those serious reasons, because we are not suiciders."

The Trident 2 can carry up to 8 warheads, just like your chart says and like I said. One of these warheads could wipe out Pyongyang.

Each Sub was capable of carrying 24, but under the Start treaty, was reduced to 20. But it's still capable of carrying 24.

 

[Zavulon]

The Trident 2 can carry up to 8 warheads, just like your chart says and like I said.

But usually they don't. More weight missile should deliver - lesser it's range. And lesser range means lesser safety for the submarine.

Of course, sometimes, nowadays, those freaks from Navy send SSBNs in "demonstrative missions", like sending USS "Alaska" in Mediterranean sea to play a "counter-force strike" (really stupid move, I'd say). It was "found" and theoretically, "sunken". Practically, it was forced to show itself and, today, it was spotted in Gibraltar HMNB. Freaking poor incompetent clowns, under command of totally incompetent Red Clown.

One of these warheads could wipe out Pyongyang.

Actually, no. Pyonyang is a big city, one can't it wipe out with one 100 kt or even 455 kt warhead. Say nothing about it's underground system.

Each Sub was capable of carrying 24, but under the Start treaty, was reduced to 20. But it's still capable of carrying 24.

It needs some repairs to make it capable of carrying 24. Not that the USA has extra money to do it and maintain increased amount of missiles.

 

[airplanemechanic]

But usually they don't. More weight missile should deliver - lesser it's range. And lesser range means lesser safety for the submarine.

Of course, sometimes, nowadays, those freaks from Navy send SSBNs in "demonstrative missions", like sending USS "Alaska" in Mediterranean sea to play a "counter-force strike" (really stupid move, I'd say). It was "found" and theoretically, "sunken". Practically, it was forced to show itself and, today, it was spotted in Gibraltar HMNB. Freaking poor incompetent clowns, under command of totally incompetent Red Clown.

View attachment 1254875


Actually, no. Pyonyang is a big city, one can't it wipe out with one 100 kt or even 455 kt warhead. Say nothing about it's underground system.


It needs some repairs to make it capable of carrying 24. Not that the USA has extra money to do it and maintain increased amount of missiles.

Since when is Trump responsible for nuclear subs? You say he can't even start a war, that's congress's job. So that means any incompetence on behalf of the military should be blamed on the ones in charge of it, congress.

Look man, I know you don't like Trump, but that doesn't make anything I said wrong.

We still have more than enough with one sub to wipe NK off the map sitting off the coast of NK and they know that.

 

[Zavulon]

Since when is Trump responsible for nuclear subs? You say he can't even start a war, that's congress's job. So that means any incompetence on behalf of the military should be blamed on the ones in charge of it, congress.

Since he became a POTUS. When he order Navy to do something stupid and provoking - they do it, like it was back in August 2025, when Dmitry Medvedev said, that he f#cked Melania's mouth, and it was nice. (I don't know if this was true, or just figure of speech).

Trump moves two nuclear subs closer to Russia in response to ‘provocative statements’

“I have ordered two Nuclear Submarines to be positioned in the appropriate regions, just in case these foolish and inflammatory statements are more than just that,” Trump wrote on Truth…

nypost.com

Look man, I know you don't like Trump, but that doesn't make anything I said wrong.

In fact, everything you said was wrong.

We still have more than enough with one sub to wipe NK off the map sitting off the coast of NK and they know that.

Even one sub can cause significant, and even "unacceptable" (in normal situation) damage. And in this situation, North Korea just show that it can fight back and cause unacceptable damage to America. Just to avoid situation like with Venezuela, where Maduro was kidnapped, and Rodriguez decided not to use her WMD (at least while Maduro is alive), they added it in their Constitution and other documents.