NationStates Jolt Archive

We have decided to start designing an ICBM, based on the M-5 Rocket System (seen here (http://www.toranoko.co.jp/image/51rocket.jpg). We will use it only as a deterrent. We would also like to point out that the warheads will be conventional, not nuclear, as we do not have a nuclear weapons program for the time being.

Stats:

Height: 30 metres
Diameter: 2.3
Mass: 120 Tons
Payload: 2 Tons

http://kryogenix.xangans.com/icbm.jpg

OOC: Is this god modding? I know, my population is only 56k, but it's non nuclear and is based on an existing rocket system.

An ICBM doesn't really have sufficient accuracy to be used as a conventional weapons platform, not to mention that whoever you fire it at will immediatly assume (justifiably so) that it has a nuclear warhead, and so will respond with a nuclear strike.

OOC: It's not GODMODing at all really, you could probably get the money together to research ICBM technology, though it would be exspensive.

However the real trouble is something called "Mutually Assured Destruction" which is the name of the state between many nuclear capable nations.

Basically put, if one nation fires a nuclear weapon at any other nuclear capable nation then it will be picked up and countered in an attempt to stop the country firing any more weapons... so in real life if Russia fires a nuke at the USA the USA would fire their arsenal in order to try to stop Russia firing more (by targeting known silos and launch sites).

Now, I understand that your weapon has no nuclear warhead... it's just a conventional ICBM. However it's impossible with modern technology (as far as I know) to detect what kind of ICBM you have fired, the automatic assumption would be that your ICBM is nuclear seeing as non-nuclear ICBM is alot of trouble to go through for it's relatively small blast...

Eitherway, they will react as though its a nuclear attack. I've seen at least two examples of this case, one was stopped in time during the Belem vs. Dark Terror war and the other was not and resulted in a couple nations having a city destroyed.

The point is that while it's possible to have ICBM's without nuclear warheads isn't not really practical and can be very dangerous if you use them.

ooc: Indeed, these people make fair points. Dra-pol recently attempted to forcibly unify the Korean peninsula, and ballistic missiles were fired at our home soil. We responded with forty of our own before the incoming missiles were confirmed to be carring conventional warheads. We wiped out half of the Republic of Korea, and the other side then launched their own nuclear retaliatory strikes. Long story short, Seoul and Pyongyang aren't what they used to be (and the side that launched the first conventionally armed ICBMs is generally considered to have ended up losing).
You could always use the technology to put up a few satellites or something, though.

Yeah, these people have made very valid point already. Also, why bother delivering an HE warhead all the way over there on the enemy's home soil? Even if you manage to get a good hit on your target, you're still not going to do a huge amount of damage; certainly nowhere near as much as if the missile carried a nuclear warhead. That sid, ICBMs don't have to have nuclear warheads...

Like I said, I'm only doing this as a deterrent. I don't plan on using them for any first strikes.