Does anyone, on either side of the political aisle, actually think that the DPRK would give up its nuclear capability without receiving in exchange commitments that the US would not be willing to give? If the answer is "no" — what happens when this (inevitably) becomes clear?
-
Show this thread
-
Replying to @wellerstein
I've been following your work on nukes for a good long while, and I'm puzzled by something to which you may know the answer. Why are we still stuck in brick-and-mortar nuclear technology? Are we really not working on something far more devastating? I was led to believe we were.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @iwrotesham
I'm not sure what you mean by "brick-and-mortar." The state-of-the-art is not "giant bombs" but "very compact weapons that you can fit a bunch of on the end of a single rocket." We developed that in the 1960s-70s. It does the job one would want very well, better than big bombs.
2 replies 1 retweet 4 likes -
Replying to @wellerstein
Still needs delivery system and is messy, as you well know. (I "love" your nuke map, if that word can be said to apply.) Have you not heard about the possible debut of laser weapons (illegally) from space?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
The real innovation in nukes from the 1970s onward has not been warhead work, but delivery vehicles. Make your missiles more accurate or more difficult to detect or whatever, and you mix things up a lot. Hence "modernization" is all about those things. I don't know about lasers.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.