Bombardierele strategice B-2 Spirit recent aduse in Guam, par a se pregati de un atac tactic nuclear asupra N Koreii!

US stealth bombers in Guam appear to be readying for a tactical nuclear strike on North Korea

B 2A US Air Force B-2 Spirit takes off at Andersen Air Force Base, in Guam, in August 2016.U.S. Air Force/Tech Sgt Richard P. Ebensberger

Correction: An earlier version of this article erroneously stated the US had sent bombers to North Korea. The bombers have been sent to Guam.

  • The US recently sent nuclear bombers to Guam that can carry tactical nukes that would be perfect for taking out Kim Jong Un.
  • Some have suggested that a quick tactical nuclear strike on North Korea could cripple the country’s nuclear infrastructure with few casualties.
  • Recent reports have suggested President Donald Trump considering a strike on North Korea, but some experts and politicians think the idea of a tactical nuclear strike is a recipe for disaster.

The US has been quietly amassing firepower in the Pacific during a lull in tensions with North Korea, but recent developments on an under-the-radar nuclear weapon suggest preparation for a potential tactical nuclear strike.

The US recently sent B-2 stealth bombers to Guam, where they joined B-1 and B-52s, the other bombers in the US’s fleet.

While the B-2 and B-52 are known as the air leg of the US’s nuclear triad, as they carry nuclear-capable air-launched cruise missiles, a smaller nuclear weapon that has undergone some upgrades may lend itself to a strike on North Korea.

Newly modified tactical nukes — a game changer?

B 61 nuclear bombs on rackA frontal view of four B-61 nuclear free-fall bombs on a bomb cart at Barksdale Air Force Base.United States Department of Defense SSGT Phil Schmitten

The B-61, a tactical nuclear gravity bomb that the B-2 can carry 16 of, has been modified in recent years to increase its accuracy and ability to hit underground targets, though that version has not yet been deployed.

Not only will the B-61’s new modification make it ideal for destroying dug-in bunkers, the kind in which North Korean leader Kim Jong Un might hide during a conflict, but it has an adjustable nuclear yield that could limit harmful radioactive fallout after a nuclear attack.

Though the US has plenty of nuclear weapons that can easily hit North Korea from land, air, or sea, they’re predominantly large ones meant to deter countries like Russia or China.

2017 paper in MIT’s International Security journal suggested that recent advances in guidance systems and nuclear weapons could allow the US to destroy all of North Korea’s nuclear infrastructure while causing 100 or so deaths, versus 2 million to 3 million deaths on both sides of the 38th parallel without them.

But Melissa Hanham, a senior research associate at the James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies, suggested the paper was flawed.

https://twitter.com/mhanham/status/870026896200810496?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw&ref_url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.businessinsider.com%2Fus-stealth-bombers-guam-tactical-nuclear-strike-north-korea-2018-1

Hanham told Business Insider that the paper’s supposition that only five sites would constitute the bulk or entirety of North Korea’s nuclear infrastructure stood without merit.

North Korea has gone to great lengths to deter nuclear or conventional strikes by spreading its nuclear infrastructure across the country. The sites are shrouded in secrecy, and the US intelligence community, despite its best, concerted efforts, has been wrong about their locations before, a former State Department official told Business Insider.

Trump seems to like the idea of tactical nuke strikes and striking North Korea

b 2 spiritB-2 Spirit bombers are part of a routine deployment providing global strike capability and extended deterrence against potential adversaries in the Indo-Asia-Pacific region. US Air Force photo by Airman 1st Class Joel Pfiester

Despite evidence that tactical nuclear weapons won’t solve the North Korean military quagmire, President Donald Trump’s administration has looked favorably on smaller nuclear weapons.

Trump’s recent nuclear posture review recommended building more small nuclear weapons, as their size would make them easier to use in a conflict — something the International Security paper supports.

The B-61 bombs live in military bases spread across Europe and are much less visible than big bombers, whose movements are often publicized. For example, The Aviationist reported in October that a civilian with a handheld radio scanner intercepted B-2 and B-52 pilots over Kansas training to pull off a strike on North Korean VIP targets.

Recent reports have suggested Trump is considering a „bloody nose” strike on North Korea, or a move designed to embarrass Kim by responding to a missile launch or nuclear test with the limited use of force.

But experts and politicians have characterized the idea of a nuclear strike as destabilizing and frankly crazy. Rep. John Garamendi, a California Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee, questioned the wisdom of it in an interview with Business Insider.

„Certainly, North Korea understands that the US is pretty tough,” Garamendi said. „The US is prepared and willing to respond to aggression by North Korea.”

He added: „But we must assume that if we were to do a bloody-nose attack, that North Korea would respond in some way. Then what?”

http://www.businessinsider.com/us-stealth-bombers-guam-tactical-nuclear-strike-north-korea-2018-1

US May Be Preparing Preemptive Strike Against North Korean Nuclear Sites

It’s no secret that the US military has been gradually amassing firepower on the Korean Peninsula since Pyongyang began testing a range of ballistic missiles in April, triggering a US military buildup across the border in South Korea. Now, it appears the Pentagon is preparing its forces there for a potential nuclear strike against North Korea.

The B-2 Spirit stealth bomber and B-52 Stratofortress strategic bomber, the two planes comprising the „air leg” of the US’ nuclear triad, have both been deployed to the Korean Peninsula. Furthermore, Business Insider reported that the B-2s may soon be equipped with modified B-61 nuclear bombs.

The B-61 thermonuclear gravity bomb has been the US’ low yield strategic and tactical nuclear bomb of choice since the 1960s. Its compact design was recently modified to increase its penetrative potential so that it can better strike at underground targets — where most of North Korea’s nuclear arsenal is believed to be.

The new B-61 also can be adjusted to greatly reduce nuclear fallout after a strike. One major point of contention behind an American nuclear strike would be the untold ruin it would bring on North Korean civilians for generations to come. Geopolitical analysts have sought a way for Washington to have its cake and eat it too: to demolish North Korea’s nuclear sites without damaging anything but those nuclear sites.

White House reports from earlier in January claimed that Trump was considering a „bloody nose” strike against Pyongyang’s nuclear sites. When asked about this possibility, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson told reporters that „we have to recognize that the threat is growing and that if North Korea does not choose the pathway of engagement, discussion, negotiation then they themselves will trigger an option.”

Another Trump lieutenant, CIA Director Mike Pompeo, made a rare public appearance for a panel hosted by the American Enterprise Institute (AEI) on Tuesday. When North Korea was inevitably brought up, Pompeo refused to rule out the possibility of an American preemptive strike against Pyongyang — although he insisted that diplomacy remained the US’ first choice.

„The president is intent on delivering a solution through diplomatic means… We are equally, at the same time, ensuring that if we conclude that is not possible, that we present the president with a range of options that can achieve his stated intention,” Pompeo told AEI.

However, while he wouldn’t take the option off the table, he also wouldn’t explicitly recommend it. Pompeo said that he would „leave to others to address the capacity or the wisdom of a preemptive strike… we’re trying to ensure that all the various options that the president might want to consider are fully informed, that we understand what’s really going on and the risks associated with each of those decisions as best we can identify them for him.”

He added that he did not buy the argument that North Korean leader Kim Jong-un would only use his nascent arsenal to defend North Korean sovereignty — as North Korean military strategy states — but may also use them to bully or even conquer South Korea. (North and South Korea, in the meantime, have recently engaged in high-level peace talks and agreed to march into the upcoming Winter Olympics under one pro-unification flag, events taken as signs of a serious thaw in relations.)

While Pompeo added that Kim is a „rational actor,” it was his opinion that Kim „would use [nuclear weapons] beyond self-preservation.”

„This is a threat to the whole world,” Pompeo said of the North Korean nuclear program.

Congressional Democrats have announced that they would oppose any strike against North Korea, limited or not; indeed, some reject the premise entirely.

„There’s no such thing as a limited strike, whether or not you use a nuclear cruise missile,” said Sen. Tammy Duckworth (D-IL), a retired US Army lt. colonel, to reporters one day after Tillerson’s remarks. „You will have massive, massive noncombatant injuries, casualties, as well as military casualties.”

A 2017 paper published by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s International Security think tank claimed that modern US nuclear weapons and guidance systems could obliterate North Korea’s nuclear infrastructure with five strategic strikes — all while only causing around 100 deaths.

Melissa Hanham, a senior research associate at the James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies, slammed the MIT study as unrealistic and unfounded. Hanham highlighted the all-important point that the incredible secretiveness of the North Korean government means that there may be nuclear sites or weapons that are unknown to their enemies, and thus would not be eliminated by a presumed „bloody nose” strike.

https://twitter.com/mhanham/status/870026896200810496?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fsputniknews.com%2Fmilitary%2F201801241061040430-us-north-korea-preemptive-strike%2F

​There is also the concern of Pyongyang’s vast arsenal of conventional weapons that most analysts agree could cause catastrophic damage to the South Korean capital of Seoul in case of armed conflict.

https://sputniknews.com/military/201801241061040430-us-north-korea-preemptive-strike/

https://georgevalah.wordpress.com

Acest articol a fost publicat în INTERNATIONAL (engleza). Salvează legătura permanentă.

Lasă un răspuns