The explosion scheduled for June 2 at the Nevada Test Site is part of an effort to design a weapon that can penetrate solid rock formations in which a country might store nuclear weapons or other weapons of mass destructionhttp://fpiarticle.blogspot.com/2006/03/plans-for-massive-blast-in-nev-draw.html
199734
With the rise in power of countries these days, we are lucky all we need to develope are bunker busting weapons.  Many countries have developed nuclear technology since the end of the "cold" war.  I'd be more concerned with the Iranians and North Koreans obtaining nuclear weapons than with the U.S. developing a weapon that could take out nuclear weapons in their silo's.
192175
Ist step in construction involves engineering thousands of centrifuges which spin a gas made from uranium ore, a difficult operation. Weapons grade enrichment is around 95%.\n\nThe next step is building a trigger mechanism.. to trigger a nuclear explosion, a major technical hurdle.\n\nThe final step is to make a device small enough to be carried by an aircraft or missile, another major technical hurdle.\n \nThere's a site that will calculate the blast impact based on kiloton yield and method of delivery, ie, airburst vs ground level detonation.  You'll have to google "nuclear blast impact calculator' since i forgot the url.
636796
No, be nice, but Reagan couldn't make it work. We're testing a system aboard a mod 747, and ground based systems, but nothing powerful enough yet to penetrate the atmosphere. Other anti-missile missile systems being tested for regional defense. Japan is partnered with us on that among others.
63450
try this website, I just did a search and this came up:\n\nhttp://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Nwfaq/Nfaq5.html
70904
From the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, it sounds like they need alot of upgrading.  They don't have as many nukes targeted on the USA as i had thought, although one would be enough.
608322
I'm speaking as the resident subject matter expert, that missile is capable of hitting Alaska, Hawaii, Californis, Oregon, Washington (not D.C. unfortunately), and some of Arizona, Utah, and Idaho.\n\nAnd for those of you who have absolute trust in the Missile defense system, all I can say is you poor sick deluded fools. It's 50/50 in tests. And that's when they've been rigged.
206259
Yes, Seneca said that.  Interesting that you would quote him. Do you know what his point was in saying "Be careful that your enemies dont get your weapons"?  Sounds a lot like that quote is very much in support of limiting nuclear proliferation Would it be best if nobody had nukes?  In the 50 years before nuclear weapons were invented, over 100 million people were killed in wars.  And in the 60+ years since, is that true?  If the US destroyed all of it's nuclear weapons, do you seriously believe this would end the problem?  That countries like North Korea and Iran would generously quite trying to build them?  The US, along with the EU, is trying to stop other countries from building nuclear weapons.  Are you trying to say that because the US, France, and the UK, among others, have nuclear weapons, that they should not try to stop proliferation?  Are you saying that the US and those other countries should get rid of their nuclear weapons, and thus would miraculously cause everyone else to stop building them?  Think about it-the US is hated by many powerful countries.  If the US got rid of their nuclear weapons, would that tend to make those countries more eager, or less, to build a weapon that, once the US had none, could aid these other countries in actually defeating the US on a battlefield?  Think through your argument- The US having nuclear weapons may be a problem, but it is unrelated to nuclear proliferation.  And, the US is not leading the battle to stop Iran from getting nuclear weapons, the EU is.
57945
It goes against the MAD doctrine, ie, being able to observe nuclear launches.  If the missiles are disguised in lead-lined cargo ships, then, we get no notice of a preemptive strike.  MAD deterred us from nuclear war for 60 years, now MAD is being thrown out the door.
656863
The US missile defense system has not yet been tested, so no one knows if it would actually works if someone launched a couple of ICBMs at the US. The US government has said it will not use the N. Korean missile launch as an oppurtunity to test it's defense system, which I find somehwat odd. Why not try it out? Also, the missile is aimed at sea, not land, so N. Korea is not actually going to nuke the US. The main issue in defending against nuclear missiles is their speed. It's hard to hit something moving at 14,000+ miles an hour that is the size of a space capsule. Also, a nuclear warhead that is shot down does NOT detonate. Nuclear weapons require exactly timed fuses to explode. Even if somehow it did go off, the explosion would be so small as to have no long-term effects.
77568
A big possibility is the Military.  There is Camp Williams and Hill Air Force Base.  You may be seeing an aircraft or parachutes.  \n\nThey have schools and also have training sites that you don't know about.\n\nAlso, think about guns, motors, and other explosives that could play a part.  Army guys love to blow stuff up!
666974
Another provocative question from Nicholas "meathead" Rage. Liberals as you call us are not quick to defend that piece of sh't, we just want our leaders to thoroughly think out any military operation regardless of reason. The cowboy Bush mentality (shoot first ask questions later) has cost us thousands of our "kids" lives and for what? Meanwhile North Korea is testing  long range missles that could hit Alaska or Hawaii, Good job Georgie Boy, we feel much safer now.
623990
The tsunami question makes me think hard...I've thought about this many times before. \n\nA nuclear explosion starts as a radiative shock which degenerates into a supercritical shock, and so on, until all that remains is a volume of gas surrounded by an expanding train of sound waves.  In water, the question would come down to the equilibrium volume of water vapor produced at the depth of the explosion.  That would primarily depend on the water pressure at that depth and the total yield, I think.\n\nI simply don't have the expertise to calculate that figure, but I suspect the total displacement would be relatively small, even for the largest weapons ever fielded.\n\nI suspect little of the energy released would ultimately be partitioned into work (mechanical lifting)...thus any tsunami would probably be small and of a relatively short wavelength.\n\nVery interesting problem to consider.
676706
Okay first of all don;t worry there missiles are not that sophisticated to actually reach the US yet.  Yet even if they do fire a missile at the US that does have a nuclear war head we would be able to shoot it down before it gets to our shores.\n\nLet me explain there are two types of nuclear missiles \n\n1.  NK has just a regular missile, this will reach a certain altitude maintain that altitude until it reaches it's destination.\n\n2.  The US has are what are called ICBM, these missiles go into the subspace and then come down which make them almost impossible to shoot down.  This was the big scare during the Cold War.  \n\nSo I wouldn't worry about NK they are just looking for attention.
320818
We all know that if they have the nuclear tech the bomb will be used to destroy many people....if they are really concerned  about energy (especially electrical) solar energy will be great for that part of the world...I am sure the U.S.A will help in this project.
533572
All the above is true,\nIt also however formed the basic understanding of Nuclear power generation.  The reaction that causes an explosion for a weapon, is the same as that in a reactor except it is controlled.  Modern ( western) nuclear generators can trace their lineage back to the Manhatten Project.
557255
North Korea does not have ballistic missiles capable of reaching targets in the US -- yet!!!  Plans to test the first such missile appear to be in go-ahead stage, but until a successful test launch and subsequent successful test launches, they will not have demonstrated a reliable long range missile system.  We also have no credible evidence that North Korea has produced a weapon capable of being mounted on the missile.  We also cannot confirm that North Korea even has any nuclear weapons at all, although we know they have sufficient plutonium for several devices and we suspect they have built several devices.\n\nKim Jong Il postures in a risky game of brinkmanship by permitting this test prep to proceed.  The missile was fueled Sunday, June 18, which is usually an indicator that the launch will go forth.  (Removing fuel is a hazardous procedure, so fueling usually means a go-ahead status.)\n\nIf the test proceeds, it will be Korea's first launch attempt of a long range missile since its unsuccessful 1998 launch of a missile over Japan.  That missile's third stage failed to engage and the missile broke up and fell into the Pacific.  Analysts fear Korea has improved the missile design since then.\n\nIf there is a launch and it is successful, we will enter a new era, and we'll see nuclear brinkmanship not seen since the Cuban missile crisis.\n\nComparisons of Korea and Iraq are not valid, and solutions will vastly differ.  \n\nIn the post-USSR era, the US stands more likely to be targeted with a nuclear weapon or weapons by terrorist organizations.  Such stateless organizations have the ambition to make such attacks, and are unhampered by any fears of retaliation, as there would be no nation-state against whcih to retaliate.\n\nNorth Korea's Kim Jong Il is fettered by his nation, and is well aware of the stakes.  \n\nI suppose, in my weary last words here tonight, I'd say that I don't think that Kim Jong Il will launch a nuclear weapon against the US because our response will not be a tactical air and ground campaign.  It will be a nuclear response.\n\nI'd like to write more, but it's late and I'm tired.  I hope what I did write makes sense and is at least somewhat informative.  I don't pretend to know how this will all play out in the coming months and years.\n\nI'm sorry to be seeing the situation develop, but that seems to be the theme of the post 9-11 world as I know it.
338588
Not only that. The same sequence of warnings could happen for Iran also. These things happen as long as there is ground to believe US (and other nations of the nuclear club) are not fair in their demands when they themselves indulge in nuclear weapons. Something like saying "I am a thief and will steal whatever I can. But anything you steal is a crime and so don't do it"