A Reasonable Assessment for global stability

Olivered

Member
I wish to propose a set of theories.

#1:
Brilliant, cunning minds inevitably rise to the top of any organizational hierarchy that is subject to natural selection.
Most of the governments of the world, and, inherently, any government where technology, the media, etc presents
a significant proof-of-work burden to leadership, are directed by individuals who are quite brilliant. Nevermind the
people we see on TV. Many of their decisions can easily be seen as not to have come from them, but from others.

Therefore- We must assume that most of the world is directed by competent leaders who will not go to war unless it is necessary.
There is no risk of nuclear war between any of the superstates, despite the sizable stockpile. Those weapons are comparable to
the spear collection of a mighty chieftain. There is only a risk of war in chaotic areas or between nations conflicting for resources.

#2:
Ukranian situation is misunderstood. If we assume that the reports by defecting spies from the former soviet union
are true, then the "democratization" of russia, as described in novellas, with many of the predictions having come true,
is a fictional effort to lul the west into a state of complacency(something which hasn't happened), then the Ukraine is still
part of Russia proper and Russia is merely activating invisible networks of influence, sweeping over resistance with military force,
and re-establishing territorial dominion, both as a training exercise for their forces and a demonstration of their capabilities to the west.
So it can really be chalked off the list of international conflicts. It's within Russia proper and even a Western presence means nothing.
Russia, a LAND power, with hundreds of years of experience in LAND wars, is not threatened by Western forces in Europe/Ukraine.
For the US and others to need to have a presence is simply a sign to Russia that they continue to represent a respectable enemy.

#3:
With regards to the Syrian(High leadership)+Lebanon(hezbollah) + Iran triad vs the Sunni commonwealth as regards the Iraq Question,
There is chronic instability produced by ideological differences over a thousand years old, instigated by acute Israeli and Western influence.
There is ZERO risk of this conflict leaking out and causing a chain reaction that creates worldwide conflict, as no nations which are
involved in this hinterland game of musical chairs consider peace or victory solely for peace or victory's sake a valuable outcome.
The west is only interested in continuing the chaos, and the other superstates are only marginally involved to extend their power projection.
So we can chalk this off too.


#4:
China has zero respect for NK, but won't allow an invasion to happen right next door to their borders. That would be enmasculating
to Chinese power projection. This won't happen, due to theory #1. However, the US could use air, naval,
and land forces on the far side of the DMZ to support and finance war by SK on NK. If this happens, China could make a repeat of
Vietnam and finance/equip NK to parity and create a stalemate. This seems quite likely as China wants to test her boundaries,
test her advances in warfighting technology against the US's advances, and spend military budget vis-a-vis 1984.

NK is a highly unstable third world country run by an emotionally charged sociopathic midget. They honestly believe in their capability
to challenge and threaten superstates globally. They have recruited talent and a large fiscal reserve, and as demonstrated in previous
economic statistics posts made by me, are in a quite healthy state for war.

My hypothesis - The only likely destabilizing(globally) event presently possible is that NK will launch an attack on the US.
This scenario isn't likely to persist, nations rise and fall all the time. I give it 5 years before some other nation is being threatened.
 

Olivered

Member
So, if we're going to be reasonable:

Of an attack: What's the risk, what's the probability, what's the potential, what can we do about it?

Attack:
Risk: NK Attacks the US and detonates one or more EMP warheads in a ballistic trajectory in near-earth orbit

The only risk I can see is that NK will attempt to detonate one or more nuclear warheads and inflict damage
in a surprise attack on the US mainland. The US isn't going to make the first move. We need casus belli to ensure that
the UN and China overtly endorse our actions even if Covertly they act against us. NK isn't going to invade SK,
there is too much US presence. Russian scientists have without any doubt informed NK leadership of the capability
of US forces and military readiness in the event of an attack. Their attack will come if at all against US civilian cities.

NK hasn't demonstrated warheads yielding over 50kt or an arsenal of over 40 warheads. It seems unlikely they will attempt
a MAD attack and blow up a handful of nukes in cities. However, as posted on the DEFCON front page, it is probable they have
the capability to attack via EMP and destroy the infrastructure of the US. NK mindset just might believe this would put them
in the history books of the world.

Probability:
This part of my post is really hard for me to write because I don't have insider contacts operating in the US space command.
I don't know the likelihood that BrightStar-4 is secretly a weapon. I think we can assume BrightStar-3 isn't, but it's possible that
it is also. If i had to guess based on intel- I would say that it is. At an average cost of $20,000 per KG to orbit, BS-4 cost
4.4 million or more to get it into space. Factoring in R&D and other costs, It was probably closer to 30 Million.
Would you spend 30 million dollars on a psy-op, when you could just as easily spend a tenth of that, send up an empty, lighter shell,
re-using existing technology?

Brightstar-4. This weapon orbits the globe once every 94 minutes. https://www.n2yo.com/satellite/?s=41332
My research leads me to conclude the following: If detonated, this weapon would take out a lot of electronics for 1,500 miles.
It could be detonated at any time. It could fry anything larger than a cell phone. However, EMP destructive patterns(on the ground)
are a lot like magnetic domains. It's not a consistent pattern. It's not a reliable pattern. There will be large spots with no
EMP and small spots with very high EMP, and the weapon designer/controller will only have a limited ability to predict where they fall.

What we have here is a warhead in space. It seems unlikely they would have significant propulsion to get it out of orbit loaded onboard,
so I don't think it's designed to attack a city. So we have one such EMP in space already.

Land-based projection is limited to their largest missiles. KN-8 and 14 have only been seen in mockups, so I find KN-11 only believable weapon.
The KN-11 is probably partly relegated to a MAD role and is armed with warheads with an unknown destructive capability(probably under 100kt).
They recently sold as many as 16 to Iran for funding. I can assume when your budget is limited it makes sense to sell part
of an initial production run. I would bet that NK has around ~100 of these weapons strategically located around the nation.
Perhaps as many as 10% would be relegated to an EMP role.

So 10 land-based EMP warheads with a range of 4000km(max). Laughable projection.

Potential
Considering we have THAAD operational in south korea(as of yesterday)
and we are regularly testing our Patriot capability(as of this month), SK is pretty well defended from Kim's warheads in the north.
He might be able to detonate a single EMP, but if he doesn't detonate it pretty far south or close to the earth, it will effect NK as well.
Since the biggest use of such a threat is as a threat itself, I doubt he would use it.
No potential of an attack on SK.

US aggression against NK has scaled up significantly. We're sending bombers, U-2 spyplanes, and naval groups their way.
We're conducting drills to mitigate the ramifications of an attack. We're conducting studies to examine the potential.
NK is getting sanctioned(today). I think you can see the odds here.


What we can do about it as civilians: Send kim jung a letter?

Conclusion:
I conclude that there is a high probability(defcon 2) that KMS-4 will either be used or an attempt to use it will be made within
the next 6 months, that it will be detonated over mainland USA, and that it will wipe out 70-80% of civilian infrastructure over
an area of 1000mi^2.
 

Olivered

Member
In response to apollo nights before i continue:
Maybe they won't attack. Who knows ;)

So, if we're going to be reasonable:

Destructively: What's the risk, what's the probability, what's the potential, what can we do about it?
This is an emergency readiness board for civilians caught in a conflict.

Destructively:
Risk: NK Attacks the US and detonates KMS-4 in a ballistic trajectory in near-earth orbit

Personal:
The risk is that anything larger than a small cell phone will experience significant EMP energy and any
digital circuitry onboard will fry.

Social:
Internet infrastructure, cellular infrastructure, large parts of the water and electric grid(in the areas most effected)
will be toast. Truck fleets will be toast. Local grocers will be toast. Point of sale systems will all be fried.
The banking systems will mostly be down. ATMS will be fried. Police communications will be down.

National:
Communications and ACH systems in the areas effected will be down. Pipelines may be effected.

Probability:

The probable destructive potential for YOU depends on where you live. If you live in the continental 48,
Your laptop, desktop, other large electronics, will all be fried, your car won't work(if it's newer than 1994)
anymore, and you won't be able to buy anything in 500 miles without cash, if you live in an effected area.

If you live on the west coast, Happily enough, Kim is not going to waste his ONE satellite on a
few coastal cities and have all the energy going eastward absorbed in the Rockies. Your risk I set at 10%.
Anyone east of the Rockies: Your risk is HIGH, at 50%.

Potential:

The potential is limited to a short-term scenario. A lot of people will receive replacement equipment due to
a national state of emergency and emergency funding. The power, water, and gas grid experiences failures as a matter
of routine function. They will fix their shit and be back online within 3 weeks. The communications infrastructure will require
a little longer but will mostly be back online within 2 months. The financial systems will be fixed within 3 weeks.

The US will begin a land war with NK and will shoot down any other satellites and prevent any new ones from getting into orbit.

What can we do about it:

If you live in the effected area(Eastern Montana, down the east side of the rockies to New Mexico, Eastward to Florida, North to Maine)
I recommend you calculate your risk based on how far you are from the epicenter. The Epicenter is St. Louis.

If you are over 660 miles from st louis(Montana, Wyoming, The Dakotas, Colorado, Texas, New Mexico, anything northeast of Penn, Florida)
There is a reduced risk that your infrastructure will go down, but your personal equipment could still fry. I recommend keeping your
backups inside tin foil or paper printout and keep some cash on hand. Water reserves will probably not be needed. I would recommend
if you don't have a food stockpile make a 2 month food stockpile now, due to food price fluctuations. If you work for a national corporation,
you may lose your job.

If you are under 660 miles from St Louis(You know where you live you bastards,btw i'm under 200 miles from st louis)
You are in the Proper Risk area. Everything is going to go down. Keep food and water on hand for everyone for at least 3 months.
This means 1 gallon of water per person per day, a large bag of salt, multivitamins(just the normal kind, it will last that long),
canned meats and vegetables, and a couple of bags of flower. Get dried milk too. You probably won't need to spend over $400 on this.
Consider canceling any subscriptions you have to services you won't be able to use, like any digital sites.

If your vehicle is fairly new, it won't work anymore. I will post an additional post specifically limited to your vehicles and try
to manage a workaround. Keep gasoline reserves- you will have friends and family with motorcycles if you need to get anywhere.

Memorize and record where your neighborhood's community centers are. Government reps will wind up there.
They will have PLENTY of work that needs to be done.
 

Olivered

Member
If you manage to magically have your vehicle turned off at the time of the EMP, then there is a significant chance it will
still work afterward.

Fixing a broken vehicle:
if you can hotwire it, and it has a manual tranny, you can drive it. What you can't hotwire, you cant fix.
When everything goes to shit, ask around for people with diesel manual transmissions and work out a barter arrangement
to let you share their vehicle.

Any arguments with this will point to studies where tests of 50microvolts/meter were used to irradiate the vehicles.
An EMP warhead will irradiate them with a blistering 100,000volts/meter. That is several orders of magnitude.

Most garden tractors and motorcycles will still work.
 

Green

Active member
apollonights said:
@Olivered - Why would North Korea attack within six months? Why not just buy time and continue to advance their arsenal?

My thoughts exactly, why not hide behind China and Russia for a couple more years while perfecting your arsenal?
 

RiffRaff

Deputy Director
Staff member
Olivered said:
The potential is limited to a short-term scenario. A lot of people will receive replacement equipment due to
a national state of emergency and emergency funding. The power, water, and gas grid experiences failures as a matter
of routine function. They will fix their shit and be back online within 3 weeks. The communications infrastructure will require
a little longer but will mostly be back online within 2 months. The financial systems will be fixed within 3 weeks.

Your assessment is exponentially more optimistic than what our local DHS people have been telling us. They estimate restoration of the power grid after an EMP event (natural or man-made) to take at least a year, if not more. We have some backup communications systems in place (either tube-based or more modern solid-state devices that are shielded), so local emergency communications will be up within hours, but of course it won't be on par with the existing systems. As for the financial system, the global economy will crash and crash hard if the US is attacked with an EMP weapon. You might be able to fix the system, but you won't be able to fix the crash, at least not quickly.

Even using your figures as valid, it will still be worse than you make it seem. Most civilians can't survive three weeks without power and access to their local food markets. And if this event occurs during extreme weather conditions (heat wave or cold snap), survival can be measured in hours, not weeks. Despite our best education efforts, people are just not prepared for an extended loss of first-world comforts. Civil order will break down within 72 hours, a week at most. And once it goes, getting it back will be extremely difficult.

Where are you getting your figures?
 

Olivered

Member
These are absolutely valid points and I'm glad you are making them. It was my intention to paint a portrait of our immediate future
with the absolute worst realistic possible situation and the best possible outcome. People need to be optimistic and positive and it's
really easy to get depressed and anxious and worn out with all of the potentially bad things happening.
I personally think this is very likely to happen, and I want to believe this will be the outcome.

The power system could come back quicker in some areas and near the edge of the effected region.
It would probably take a year or more to fully restore the grid to all effected areas. However, by the third month
you WILL have some kind of government rep telling you when it will be back if at all, and most regions will
have service. This is my expectation on the basis that we have some competence in our leadership.

Financial system: the global economy going to shit sounds hilarious. Seriously, I was just talking about ATM access
and ACH transfers between financial institutions locally. Stuff needed for business to resume. I was assuming dark fiber,
backup generators, the works will come into play pretty quickly and the system will be fixed in short order.

Most citizens don't read defconwarningsystem forum posts. I expect a lot of people to die. If this was understated, I do apologize,
it's just, nearly every scenario we have the potential to discuss or explore is dark, mostly because people are unorganized and stupid.
I forgot to include into my depiction what our prepared survivalist should expect, and it will depend largely on where you live
and how many people live there. The cities are going to be chaotic no doubt.
 

apollonights

Active member
Thanks for starting a thread to discuss this. I wish more people took such matters seriously. I would note that I think your analysis is far to optimistic. If the "North Korean War of 2017" broke out tomorrow a worse case scenario is FAR worse than you've written.

Open source intelligence states that the North Koreans have 21 nuclear devices BUT NK is a closed totalitarian state and those are just guesses. Since this is a worse case scenario let's assume it is about double. Then let's say that the reliability of the NK arsenal is 50 percent. Assuming the North has 40 nuclear devices they would likely shred their Rocket Force as follows keeping in mind that half of them will fail. We are assuming 10 KT devices:

2 to be kept in reserve tipped on solid fuel rockets for if the Americans/Chinese invade North Korea proper.

6 for South Korean targets, 6 for Japanese targets, 6 for American targets.

If I had to guess given the short logistics leash of the NK Army they wouldn't attempt an offensive into South Korea (such an offensive would be bad for the North in any case and since this is a worse case let's assume their military strategists are competent). Instead this will be a war of WMD to a much greater extent than most people assume.

Seoul is struck with the infamous artillery and rocket attack mixed with chemical shells. The North hits population centers/ports with its nuclear arsenal. NK Special Operations also sow havoc in the South. The extent of the conventional rocket attacks, artillery shellings and nuclear attacks reduce the South to the status of a third world nation within 72 hrs. The South Korean military/American military in the South remains largely intact though.

For Japan the North detonates two nuclear weapons to generate an EMP effect knocking out a good chunk of Northeast Asia's power grid and reducing it to the stone age. The rest are ground strikes aimed at American bases in Japan.

The attacks on the United States are the most unexpected. Guam, Honolulu and surprisingly to many Los Angeles (LA via a cargo ship nuclear weapon at the Port of Los Angeles not via missile strike) are struck with ground level strikes.

The most surprising attack though is an action by North Korean Q-ships outfitted with missile launchers that send 6 missiles tipped with 10 KT special purpose Nuclear EMP warheads. Only 3 work properly but the entire power grid of North America (except parts of Central/Southern Mexico) is taken offline.

From what I've described so far we already have a global depression the likes of which the world has never seen, the plunging of South Korea, Japan, Canada, parts of Mexico, and the United States into darkness that will last up to a year at BEST, over a dozen nuclear strikes, the chemical and physical leveling of Seoul along with the destruction of all of South Korea's critical infrastructure, likely political assassinations by NK sleeper cells in Allied nations, AND I'm not finished.

See one thing that is rarely talked about in all of this is that biological weapons are a lot easier to make now and days. A nation-state like North Korea would have little problem creating a super-plague to kill upwards of 90 percent of the planet. Theoretically 100 percent but I've no open source that such a disease has ever existed..well smallpox killed of 98 percent of some Native American communities in the 1500s so I suppose it isn't that crazy of an idea to get to 99 percent.

Anyway the North has a dead switch biological weapons program and uses its extensive Special Operations and spy network to spread the virus internationally weeks before this first strike on 5 June 2017. Even IF society could recover from everything else when facing a 90 percent death rate from an R12 level disease not even a U.S. that hadn't just suffered nuclear strikes AND EMP wouldn't be able to remain a nation-state.

In the end the United States (and maybe China given the biological weapon released along with the fact that parts of their power grid was impacted by the East Asian EMP) strikes the North with nuclear weapons before collapsing itself over the next few months. On top of ALL that, so many nuclear strikes have gone off over populated areas nuclear winter kicks end dropping temperatures 1.1 C and making agriculture a lot harder for a decade.

Most of the nation-states would collapse. We would be lucky for 5 percent of the species to make it out of such a war.

I should note once again that what I just wrote is a WORST case scenario and is not the most probable course of a North Korean war gone hot tomorrow though.
 

apollonights

Active member
Olivered said:
You are incredibly silly and dystopic. But I do think we should be at Defcon 2.

Please do well which portion is silly? I will agree my assessment was dystopic although as I noted it was not supposed to be the most plausible analysis of a North Korean war of 2017 but a worse case scenario.

That said what portion of my analysis do you find to be silly?

The biological weapon threat?
The issue of nuclear winter?
The issue of North Korean nuclear strikes?
The North Koreans bombarding Seoul with chemical and conventional weapons?
South Korea getting hit with hundreds of conventional rockets? South Korea facing North Korean Special Operations?
North Korean sleep cells?
The North Korean EMP threat?

I don't see much silliness in any of that. The most far fetched portion of my analysis is the idea of North Korean Q Ships and even that is within the realm of possible. If needed I can provide extensive citations and support for each of my points. Few truly anticipate just how dark a North Korean war can get and how much asymmetrical power a regime can hold if willing to go down swinging with WMD...
 

Olivered

Member
apollonights said:
The attacks on the United States are the most unexpected. Guam, Honolulu and surprisingly to many Los Angeles (LA via a cargo ship nuclear weapon at the Port of Los Angeles not via missile strike) are struck with ground level strikes.

The most surprising attack though is an action by North Korean Q-ships outfitted with missile launchers that send 6 missiles tipped with 10 KT special purpose Nuclear EMP warheads. Only 3 work properly but the entire power grid of North America (except parts of Central/Southern Mexico) is taken offline.
We know where they have ships and what they have on board. We are not asleep regarding this. The United States navy is the largest,
most well-equipped navy in the world and has the second largest airforce in the world.
apollonights said:
The North Koreans bombarding Seoul with chemical and conventional weapons?
South Korea getting hit with hundreds of conventional rockets? South Korea facing North Korean Special Operations?
North Korean sleep cells?

We have thaad in place regarding nukes.
As for a conventional rocket bombardment with chemical, explosive, and other munitions-
It's a serious problem. I didn't contemplate full-on SK-NK war in my scenario however. SK being auxillary to the USA,
defeating the US will automatically(in NK eyes) give them victory over SK.

Sleeper cells are an interesting topic. Let's continue on that topic.


apollonights said:
See one thing that is rarely talked about in all of this is that biological weapons are a lot easier to make now and days. A nation-state like North Korea would have little problem creating a super-plague to kill upwards of 90 percent of the planet. Theoretically 100 percent but I've no open source that such a disease has ever existed..well smallpox killed of 98 percent of some Native American communities in the 1500s so I suppose it isn't that crazy of an idea to get to 99 percent.

Just, no. Sorry, no. Fortunately, we're still at least 10 years from "kitchen lab" access to advanced biological weapons.
ISIL is comparable to NK in terms of developmental and investigative capability. Their efforts were inconclusive.
The top of the line is anthrax and novichok nerve agents, and NK has only demonstrated VX, which has been around since the 50's.
For now, we can defend against this.

Sadly, the world's leaders have not listened to experts and concerned citizens about kitchen lab biological weapons.
That any mad scientist can get on google and pull up all the research studies they need, and, for a few thousand dollars,
very nearly have a complete dna/rna editing system- we're on the precipice of such a situation.
 

Olivered

Member
One more note: nuclear winter.

http://www.nucleardarkness.org/warconsequences/fivemilliontonsofsmoke/
I suggest reading this.

A strike involving less than 10 nukes that hit their target will not conclusively result in nuclear winter.
A strike of 10 nukes of less than 50kt each wont even make a smoke cloud big enough to notice.
 

RiffRaff

Deputy Director
Staff member
Olivered said:
Financial system: the global economy going to shit sounds hilarious. Seriously, I was just talking about ATM access
and ACH transfers between financial institutions locally. Stuff needed for business to resume. I was assuming dark fiber,
backup generators, the works will come into play pretty quickly and the system will be fixed in short order.

I knew what you were talking about, and in general I agree with your assessment on the system. I just don't think you are taking into account the global panic that will ensue the moment a nuclear weapon is detonated in combat anywhere on the planet. It could be a Pakistan/India exchange with no other countries involved. Our assessment is that the stock markets will crash through panic selling and the global economy will grind to a halt. You have to remember that nuclear weapons are psychological weapons as much as they are strategic. Think about this: If 9/11 had taken place through the use a small 1 - 5 KT demolition nuke, resulting in the exact same casualties and the exact same damage to Manhattan, do you think history would have played out the exact same way? Or do you think the psychological trauma of being hit with a nuclear weapon instead of airplanes would have resulted in more dire consequences?

Would the economy recover? Absolutely. How long would it take? There is much disagreement on that. But don't underestimate the sheer chaos that would result from a nuclear detonation somewhere.
 

apollonights

Active member
We know where they have ships and what they have on board. We are not asleep regarding this. The United States navy is the largest,
most well-equipped navy in the world and has the second largest airforce in the world.
Not according to the previous Secretary of Defense.
Without specifically mentioning flags of convenience, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld warned on Wednesday of the difficulty of monitoring North Korea’s trade. “There’s so much moving around the world by land, sea and air that it is practically impossible — not impossible, but certainly it would take a lot of countries cooperating with a high degree of cohesion,” and cohesion has been lacking, he said during a question-and-answer period at Maxwell-Gunter Air Force Base in Alabama.

Until 2002, North Korea tended to register its ships as Cambodian, using a registration office that the Cambodian government had authorized in Singapore. Marcus Hand, the Asia editor for Lloyd’s List, a shipping industry newspaper, said dozens of North Korean ships used to carry the Cambodian flag.

He cautioned, however, that it is often difficult to know with certainty who owns a ship, since ships are often held through various companies registered all over the world. No one outside North Korea really knows for sure how many cargo vessels the country has registered under other flags.
[1]

Furthermore remember that even if the Q-Ship plot is the most unrealistic portion of this simulated attack you could replace it out for a NK satellite based attack and generate the same EMP effect.
We have thaad in place regarding nukes.
Yes but THAAD is far from 100 percent effective for one. Secondly it is dramatically less effective when you do simultaneous launches which the NK have been practicing. Third even IF THAAD was as effective as you note vs nuclear warheads it would have a hard time figuring out which missiles are dummy missiles, which are the real deal, which are conventional etc. Fourth even IF you overcome all that with some magic blackbox U.S. project the North would likely just use its Special Operations to insert nuclear weapons into the South. No matter which way you look at a worse case scenario for a North Korean war IS going to see nuclear detonations in East Asia at minimum. Fifth if the North wants to EMP wipe the region that gives the U.S. a lot few stages/chances to stop them because the North's missile wouldn't need to reenter to do such a move.
I didn't contemplate full-on SK-NK war in my scenario however. SK being auxillary to the USA,
defeating the US will automatically(in NK eyes) give them victory over SK.
A true Korean War of 2017 would see South Korea levelled and reduced to a third world nation at minimum. BTW if such damage could just be limited to South Korea it would be a best case scenario.

Sleeper cells are an interesting topic. Let's continue on that topic.
These are frightening. I'll just let the open source I found do the talking.
One former member of the elite, Kang Myong-do said North Korean spies are operating in countries across the world including the United States, where he estimates hundreds may be working at any one time.
[2]

I will note that a North Korean biological outbreak would likely be helped spread by this corps of spies and sleeper agents.
Just, no. Sorry, no. Fortunately, we're still at least 10 years from "kitchen lab" access to advanced biological weapons.
That is incorrect. I could rant for hours on how bad the threat from biological weapons is but that is a topic for another thread.
Advances in DNA-manipulation technology, cheap lab equipment, and information posted on the internet enable a single person to make artificial smallpox or worse. With “professional” scientists in controlled labs accidentally making human-transmissible forms of highly lethal avian flu and publishing the instructions, we must expect that DIY bio folks in their garage, biohackers, lunatics, terrorists, or countries like Iran and North Korea will either accidentally or intentionally unleash a BVP.
A National Defense University study of the GMO threat found that “the tools and information required for genetic modification of microorganisms are readily available worldwide.” They are also very cheap, and “the work can be successfully accomplished by a small cadre [of three people].” This study estimated that the materials and facilities to weaponize a bioagent would cost about $250,000.
[3]
ISIL is comparable to NK in terms of developmental and investigative capability. Their efforts were inconclusive.
ISIL has verified access to BSL-3 facilities mass producing anthrax and god knows what else off camera? I'm being serious do you have information on such capabilities?
The top of the line is anthrax and novichok nerve agents, and NK has only demonstrated VX, which has been around since the 50's.
For now, we can defend against this.
From what is open source at least. I very much doubt that if the North has produced a super-plague they would want such information to become public information because then the international community could create vaccines right now to blunt the effect. Them releasing the pictures of their Pyongyang Bio-Institutue was probably partially a PSYOPS to remind us that the implication is that this is what you are seeing. Imagine what you aren't...

Lastly regarding nuclear winter you are correct that you need roughly 1500 KT to produce the effects I was describing. The NK attacks I speculated would only produce 130 KT but the United States would respond with nuclear force to:

The biological attack
The chemical attacks
The nuclear attacks
The EMP attacks

Assuming the U.S. ONLY responds with one W87 warhead (which is probably unrealistic IMO) that is another 300 KT. Plus the added effects of the 5 NK EMP weapons further destroying the Ozone with 50 KT. All together that is about 480 KT. It is hard to know how much damage the Ozone would take in such a scenario.

We are also making a big assumption that as the world's nation-states collapse (from the whole electricity is out in Northeast Asia and North America thing) along with the super-plague spreading that no more nuclear weapons will be used...That is a BIG assumption to make given how many thousands of them are out there.

References: [1] http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/20/world/asia/20shipping.html
[2]http://edition.cnn.com/2015/05/21/asia/north-korea-spies/index.html
[3]https://www.the-american-interest.com/2016/09/20/the-age-of-designer-plagues/
 

Doc

Well-known member
I've said it before, but Ill repeat it here to cool down the fear porn for anyone who might be googleing "nuclear winter/war" and end up reading this.

The theory of nuclear winter is directly contradicted by observations done over the 4 decades since it was first presented.

Harvard's Russell MacGregor Seitz, now prof. emeritus, did for instance do matmathical studies of firestorms and found them to lack the properties needed to produce nuclear winter.

One such study, and a good starting point for those who would want to embedd themselves in this topic, is an article published in Nature called "Siberian fire as "nuclear winter" guide".

In this paper, dr. Seitz studies the properties of a firestorm half the size of western europe and its (in)ability to alter weather-patterns. The findings, though published in Nature, never found its way into popular science. Later papers supporting the findings of dr. Seitz shared that fate.

Hiroshima, Nagasaki and Chernobyl over time produced the posibillity of long-term follow ups that so far has de-dramatizied the effects of nuclear weapons and radiation on human beings. Erupting vulcanoes, blazing oil wells and siberian forrest fires have contributed with meteorological data and the possibility of analysis. To find these studies, do a scientific search in google and look for articles from esteemed publications. Concentrate on articles doing actual data-gathering and analysis.

In all dealings in scientific material and theories, it is important to note that only the most spectacular, fearmongering or out-of-this-world, theories make their way to "popular science" - all findings pointing in other directions are shelved as they dont sell. Human beings are of an hysterical nature and most people will want to read the spectacular results. This will produce a popular paradigm and alter what you find in google,

So to gain any true knowledge on any matter, one has to to be able to look thoroughly. One has to search specifically for any article contradicting the paradigm one might wish to explore.

Good luck and happy hunting!
Doc
 

Drumboy44

DEFCON Staff
Staff member
Doc said:
I've said it before, but Ill repeat it here to cool down the fear porn for anyone who might be googleing "nuclear winter/war" and end up reading this.

The theory of nuclear winter is directly contradicted by observations done over the 4 decades since the it was first presented.

Harvard's Russell MacGregor Seitz, now prof. emeritus, did for instance do matmathical studies of firestorms and found them to lack the properties needed to produce nuclear winter.

One such study, and a good starting point for those who would want to embedd themselves in this topic, is an article published in Nature called "Siberian fire as "nuclear winter" guide".

In this paper, dr. Seitz studies the properties of a firestorm half the size of western europe and its ability to alter weather-patterns. The findings, though published in Nature, never found its way into popular science. Later papers supporting the findings of dr. Seitz shared that fate.

Hiroshima, Nagasaki and Chernobyl over time produced the posibillity of long-term follow ups that so far has de-dramatizied the effects of nuclear weapons and radiation on human beings. To find these studies, do a scientific search in google and look for articles from esteemed publications.

In all dealings in scientific material and theories, it is important to note that only the most spectacular, fearmongering or out-of-this-world, theories make their way to "popular science" - all findings pointing in other directions are shelved as they dont sell. Most people will want to read the spectacular results and this will effect google.

A popular paradigm will form, and to be able to look through it, one has to search specifically for any article contradicting the paradigm.

Good luck!

It was only in 1982 and 1983 that another possible consequence became the subject of intensive scientific investigation and extensive political discussion: severe climatic effects. A major nuclear war would lead to vast amounts of soot and dust being lofted into the atmosphere, most importantly from the burning of cities. This material would absorb incoming solar radiation but continue to allow infrared heat from the earth's surface to escape to outer space. The result could be a significant drop in surface temperatures, especially in continental interiors. The temperature drop could cause massive death by freezing and destruction of ecosystems. The popular term for this is 'nuclear winter', which for convenience I will use in preference to some other less emotive but more cumbersome phrase such as 'global climatic effects of nuclear war, especially temperature decreases'.

https://www.uow.edu.au/~bmartin/pubs/88spp.html
 

Doc

Well-known member
Drumboy44 said:
Doc said:
I've said it before, but Ill repeat it here to cool down the fear porn for anyone who might be googleing "nuclear winter/war" and end up reading this.

The theory of nuclear winter is directly contradicted by observations done over the 4 decades since the it was first presented.

Harvard's Russell MacGregor Seitz, now prof. emeritus, did for instance do matmathical studies of firestorms and found them to lack the properties needed to produce nuclear winter.

One such study, and a good starting point for those who would want to embedd themselves in this topic, is an article published in Nature called "Siberian fire as "nuclear winter" guide".

In this paper, dr. Seitz studies the properties of a firestorm half the size of western europe and its ability to alter weather-patterns. The findings, though published in Nature, never found its way into popular science. Later papers supporting the findings of dr. Seitz shared that fate.

Hiroshima, Nagasaki and Chernobyl over time produced the posibillity of long-term follow ups that so far has de-dramatizied the effects of nuclear weapons and radiation on human beings. To find these studies, do a scientific search in google and look for articles from esteemed publications.

In all dealings in scientific material and theories, it is important to note that only the most spectacular, fearmongering or out-of-this-world, theories make their way to "popular science" - all findings pointing in other directions are shelved as they dont sell. Most people will want to read the spectacular results and this will effect google.

A popular paradigm will form, and to be able to look through it, one has to search specifically for any article contradicting the paradigm.

Good luck!

It was only in 1982 and 1983 that another possible consequence became the subject of intensive scientific investigation and extensive political discussion: severe climatic effects. A major nuclear war would lead to vast amounts of soot and dust being lofted into the atmosphere, most importantly from the burning of cities. This material would absorb incoming solar radiation but continue to allow infrared heat from the earth's surface to escape to outer space. The result could be a significant drop in surface temperatures, especially in continental interiors. The temperature drop could cause massive death by freezing and destruction of ecosystems. The popular term for this is 'nuclear winter', which for convenience I will use in preference to some other less emotive but more cumbersome phrase such as 'global climatic effects of nuclear war, especially temperature decreases'.

https://www.uow.edu.au/~bmartin/pubs/88spp.html

Wonderful!

TTAPS ( Turco, Toon, Ackerman, Pollack, Sagan) are the main proponents of the NW-theory. Their model indicated a nuclear winter would be triggered by 100 burning oilwells or more. Saddam set almost 1000 ablaze. Nothing happened and TTAPS' model blew up in their faces (pun intended). Still, to this day, good money are being made pushing an auto-disproven hypothesis.

A beautiful example of what I wrote above!

(PS: This discussion started in the 50ies, not in 1982. An F for Fail. Perhaps the good professor Martin would be more comfortable staying in the Humanities?)
 
Top