LONDON, England (Reuters) -- North Korea's envoy in Britain says Pyongyang has a nuclear deterrent that was ready to use and powerful enough to deter any U.S. attack.

---

...would only use its capability in self-defense. Asked if North Korea had a nuclear bomb, he said: "What we are saying is, a nuclear deterrent capability."

---

It said last month it was prepared to demonstrate the existence of its nuclear deterrent "when an appropriate time comes."

---

But Thursday's comments appear to be the first time it has explicitly stated that it has a nuclear weapon ready to deploy.

Ri said the deterrent was made of plutonium, most of which was recently reprocessed but was extracted before a 1994 freeze on its nuclear weapons program under a pact with Washington. It was ready to use should the United States attack, he said.

---

Adam Ereli repeated the long-standing U.S. position that, "we have no intention of attacking North Korea."

---

Analysts said North Korea was seeking to up the ante with Washington with its comments on a nuclear deterrent.

"They've got the best of both worlds here -- a virtual deterrent. They may not have (nuclear capability), but everybody thinks they have and have to assume they have. ... It's the next best thing to having one," said William Drennan, Korea expert, United States Institute of Peace, a government-funded think tank.

Source (http://edition.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/asiapcf/east/11/06/nkorea.reactor.reut/index.html)



Very true, no one knows for certain if NK has nukes due to the simple fact that they haven't exploded one...yet. Albeit we cannot deny that NK has been reprocessing fissile materials in the last year. Also NK has begun it seems low production of her TP 2's missiles, and her new tested missile the SS-N-6 from the USSR, all she did was made it a land launch able version. I am not certain whether she has made it into local production, but certainly it does exist (due to a SK intel. assessment of the Pyongyang area around the time of the 55th anniversary of the DPRK, at Mirim AB they located a new unknown missile, almost certainly a SS-N-6 variant. With all this new info coming out of a reclusive NK the threat assessment has to be taken more seriously. With btwn 500-1000 ballistic missiles (Frog's ---> TP2's---SS-N-6) and it seems the capability to deliver these payloads, is it that the two sides have reached the breaking point? I don't think that there is much of a choice with NK. The US government is starting to move in the right direction of a agreement, I agree with the US government that NK should give up it's nuclear stance. For NK these issues are really a break or make one. If NK keeps its nuke program, the reform needed for it to modernize will not happen. With NK getting rid of its WMD program, Japan and possibly the US will actually help NK economically. We have to remember though that the NK nuke program is Kim Jung Il's baby, and he will be VERY reluctant to give it up without a formal and honest treaty. Both NK and the US have not lived up to their parts of the 1994 agreement. What can't we do with NK is the problem; NK is not a very stable state. As thus when the choke hold comes on her, she will bite... big. If NK does detonate her nuke, the situation will change 180. I believe that NK does have nukes... weapons grade at this moment in time. NK has surprised even the most hardened professionals in the past. With financial assistance from Iran, and tech help from everyone China, Russia, Iran, Syria, etc. NK fields a powerful bragging right. Even if the NK's don't have a nuke capable weapon, the mere idea or threat of one is enough for all states involved. About NK's ability to bring warheads, she has been suspected to have developed a more advanced capability then Saddam's rather primitive warheads from his Al-Hussein missiles:

...Today this is not the case with North Korean derived warhead technology. North Korea successfully demonstrated payload spin up with the satellite launch attempt of the Taep'o-dong-1 or PAEUTUSAN-1 booster. The Paeutusan-1 solid propellant third stage both demonstrated a near full duration burn and the spin up of the stage and satellite along its longitudinal axis. However, the third stage solid motor ruptured, de-orbiting the satellite, almost immediately after orbital insertion while achieving orbital velocity.


I personally believe that NK can launch a missile, and even put simple counter-measures on her warheads as well. With the tech that NK got from Syria, Iran, Pakistan, and even Russia her warhead tech is well ahead of what is perceived. What the Americans have to understand is that NK is not a diverse economy. The big money earner is these ballistic missiles, over $1 billion over 5 years, making her the world's largest exporter of these technologies. Unless the west can actually substitute this with investment, or aid. There is no incentive for NK to give up her ballistic missile programs. NK may not have a nuke at all, but is anyone wiling to bet Tokyo on that assumption?

No test = no serviceable weapon.

The CIA thinks they could have 1-2, but their hypothesis is based off of known Plutonium inventory and manufacturing capabilities. But for a rudimentary nuclear program to be trustworthy, it needs to have its output tested. Israel has powerful supercomputers to perform tests of weapon designs the same way we do, so their ostensible rogue arsenal has already been "tested" in simulation - which for all intents and purposes is good enough. NK doesn't have these luxuries.

Plus, a test would grab a LOT of attention. A lot more than when India and Pakistan tested theirs. And attention is exactly what NK wants right now, as indicated by their nuclear dick waving. So I'm going with the no test = no weapon theory.

as indicated by their nuclear dick waving

Shall we grow up?

No test = no serviceable weapon

I agree... to a extent. The test is necessary to indicate that NK has a working weapon, but NK most likely has ready to fire warheads, no one country is wiling to call this bluff.

The CIA thinks they could have 1-2, but their hypothesis is based off of known Plutonium inventory and manufacturing capabilities.

Increased to about 5-12 devices.

But for a rudimentary nuclear program to be trustworthy, it needs to have its output tested.

That is me personally; I believe that Pakistan has already played a essential role in NK's weapons development. Maybe we are downplaying the role of those Pakistani nuke tests to the Nk's.

So I'm going with the no test = no weapon theory.

But you will not be wiling to call her bluff would you. That's the point of this thread.

Originally posted by nico
But you will not be wiling to call her bluff would you.Yes.

Spoken like someone who's confident he won't have to pay the bill if he's wrong.

Well, even if I am wrong and they do have a serviceable weapon, that doesn't necessarily mean they'd use it. A nuclear strike by NK against a US protectorate would be tantamount to national suicide for them. They want food, fuel, and a promise that they won't be invaded.

Kimmy's batshit insane, but not to that degree.

They want food, fuel, and a promise that they won't be invaded.

so they want food and peace, is that not what we all want, why is it so hard to make a peace agreement.

True, so very true. Typical of the Chicken Hawk attitude.

NK against a US protectorate would be tantamount to national suicide for them

Like NK doesn’t know this? Are you serious? I am pretty certain if NK is attacked or she attacks her total war strategy will be based on WMD pre-emptive attacks. Here is what NK doctrine on Nukes is:

North Korea may see the threat of use of nuclear weapons against US coalition partners or allies as a powerful tool in undermining US options for coalition warfare, or in seeking through coercion to undermine US basing or other support for operations. North Korea must also perceive enormous value threatening Japan in order to deny the United States access to key ports and airfields in the south.
---
North Korea might also seek to discourage Japanese support for reinforcments through threatening the use of nuclear weapons against US facilities in Japan, or threatening the use of chemical or biological weapons against the Japanese population, delivered either by missiles or clandestine means.

---

The Destruction Phase of OPLAN 5027 evidently poses the issue of national entity survival for the North Korean regime, and would be the most plausible circumstances under which the North would plausibly contemplate initiating the use of nuclear weapons, striking first in the last resort.


So again... we we flip the buck?

so they want food and peace, is that not what we all want, why is it so hard to make a peace agreement.

Because NK threatens US power in the region and it is a viable threat to the US. If NK does detonate a weapon, just the mere existence of it is enough to thwart any US attack.

Originally posted by nico
Like NK doesn’t know this? That's exactly my point. They do know this. That's why they would never invoke a nuclear strike unless they desired to be utterly annihilated.

And that is my point as well, why give them that option? Why not give them the agreement in return for the nuke program to be stopped? As long as the agreement is not signed, the question remains valid and too the point. Are you wiling to call her bluff you said yes. You go to war, she's on the verge of losing, and she then uses her nukes. So go on chicken hawk, kill millions, and sacrifice your own economy...for what? I will never know.