Any physicsfag here care to explain?

why not just hit the DMZ with a neutron bomb?
any survivors won't be able to approach irradiated artillery pieces. and the amount of fallout is miniscule so Seoul will (likely) be safe, or so I would think anyway

is this a viable idea or not?

Go to sleep, you are drunk.

you don't even know what the dmz is

Are you saying if Israel does it? If so, then yes I support this idea.

Israel, please drop neutron bombs on the demilitarized zone! This would be a Godsend!

>why not just nuke millions of innocents?

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

well in the case of a war, dumbass
lets say the norks start shelling Seoul with the massed artillery there. is there a faster way you know of to stop it?

you're right, that means they won

If Israel drops the neutron bombs, it would never be too late to drop them after they already shelled Seoul.

I don't see how this is a physics problem. THis is a political issue. THere's a reason nobody uses nuclear bombs in conflicts.

Unviable.
>using nuclear weapons to irradiate NK
I'm sure that won't shake the bee hive
>hoping radiation effects their artillery
It's not all at the DMZ
>won't effect Seoul
Even if it didn't, who is stopping Kim from lobbing nukes at China, Japan or South Koreas major cities at leisure.
Thanks for bombing Damascus btw..

even if you shitpost to the best of your ability we still don't like you israel

well, what if they nuke SK or Japan BEFORE it? not as a rhetorical question, I simply wonder if this can efficiently turn the DMZ worthless for the kims IF a non-conventional war starts

No, using a neutron bomb on the DMZ is retarded. Why irradiate hundreds of square miles that doesn't have anything except mines and some norks and ROC patrols?
There would be no reason to use nukes in a NORK war, half those fuckers would surrender anyways. They aren't dumb, they want to live and be free and they'll go with the side that will win and it's NOT going to be Kim.

neutron bombs are not magical people killers like in fiction. it's still a fucking nuclear explosion that blows the fuck out of shit, it's just rigged for maximum neutron radiation instead of maximum fallout. but make no mistake, it would still core a city.

well a few problems...
1) radiation will kill millions, and leave zones uninhabitable for centuries.
2) potential nuclear fallout in china and russia (nuclear powers) and that could be a bigger issue
3) if america launches nukes then a new global precedence is set that using nukes on your enemies is acceptable (again what could the US say if china and russia chose to the same thing)
4) SK could be damaged... a failure if more die from a nuclear war than none if no escalation occured.
5) why the DMZ? there are UN, US and SK troops there and its not where any nukes of capable millatry facilities and its next to SK and near Seoul!?
6) DMZ nuked, Kim is alive he launches nukes at japan and SK and they're destroyed inc. US navy

>a neutron bomb

invent one first, schlomo

I'm not remotely sure they don't fear the americans and surrendering to them just as much as they fear their regime, if not more

>hit the middle of the dmz with a neutron bomb
>it kills a bunch of plants and some wildlife
>maybe one or two sentries on either side of the border die of radiation poisoning

>fallout
*explosive yield.
>downloading fallout 2 right now

In that case you are advocating "salt the earth" or "scorched earth" policy between the nations to do what exactly?

Yes and no. Why not just blow them the fuck up without irradiating them?

Tactically nuking an area in order to prevent ground troops moving through it is serious WW3 shit.

I'd expect that shit from China or Russia not the USA. (Due to the fact they are seperate from by two oceans anyway).

>warmongering kike
As common as traps on Sup Forums

They fear war, and they fear retribution from both sides. But every time people go there for that 1-2 week visit, they're curious and like to ask foreigners questions and forced to say and do the things they do or they and their families face retribution. As soon as this ability to instill fear across the country degrades, Kim's control degrades. Any major conflict against NK will probably result in his suicide or assassination by a group of people tired of his and his top leadership's bullshit.

Are you guys autistic? NK just failed their second missle launch this month they have no chance of nuking any island nation near them and to nuke China they'd have to drive it there. The only other alternative is dropping one out of a plane, if NK even has that technology.

>Star Trek weapons are real

The largest bombs ever made are still just hydrogen bombs. Neutron bombs are a theoretical super weapon we don't have yet.

who is this retarded dumbass faggot?

Typical superior high-IQ Jew.

probably because there's lots of SK and US personnel there too and then NK would just fire longer range rockets at SK

Sure they have almost no chance of hitting us, however if you would stop watching Fox News for two seconds you'd know they have the capacity to hit South Korea, Japan and China's population centres.

Prove me wrong. You're talking about their ICBM tests and longer range shit. They already can fuck up shit close to them.

That's neutronium bombs.
Neutron bombs are real, they're just misunderstood. The "they only kill people and not structures" thing is bullshit. 90% of the damage pattern is identical to a regular nuke, with only a sliver around the edge doing damage more by radiation than blast.

Shit thread is shit 4/10 replied

I'm sure hitting the demilitarized zone between north and South Korea will be whole effective. Put this kike in charge of a Military now without delay. How is he not a General already?

Thanks Russia!

they can hit them with small numbers of conventional warheads. their nukes are primitive as fuck and barely even qualify for the name. they're nowhere near fitting one on the end of a missile.

>why not just hit the DMZ with a neutron bomb?
To accomplish what? Taking over North Korea?

Serious question:

How can the US beat NK without a single hit in Seoul? nuclear or conventional...

Is that even possible?

Relativistically true.
However a single warhead successfully detonating would show you how much of a terrorist attack 9/11 was and how much this an act of war.
The number of human lives that would be lost on both sides is the issue. Not the size of Kim's dick mate.

a high altitude netron bomb effectiveness would drop fast as 1 over the lethal radius cubed 1/r3.

a neutron bomb is effectively a specialized nuke, but designed to produce neutrons primarily.

Neutron bomb development taught us that bomb itself would have a very short shelf life making storage difficult at best.

Tsar Bomba, would barely cover Pyongyang. The NK have had 65+ years to tunnel the entire country ). Currently no country has a nuke big enough that can be redesigned on short notice to be a neutron bomb.

The bomb at best would do just "surface" damage to NK. Leveling the entire country by making it one large glass parking lot would STILL be touching the surface, militarily. Hiding in tunnels the NK would use small and medium arms with proverbial jungle booby traps in tunnels.

Even if China, Russia, USA all ad a koombya session, teamed together, leveled it by nukes. NK would be barely phased militarily.

In short, It will come down to an extended ground troop campaign AT BEST.

NK is just one giant clusterfuck somolians wouldn't even touch/pirate