Russia wants to put a nuclear weapon in space. Congress has their hair on fire. Is it an EMP?

[justoffal]

Yeah, I think so...

Of course.....those poor boys in DC are suffering mightily without their grift and graft.....

" Where's my monthly envelope bitch". ?

 

[bendog]

The USSF had a strategic and successful launch yesterday, so these demented LEFTIST zombies thought a good story of the OPPOSITE would be a good idea to stir up the muck.
That's ALL this BULLSHIT is.

Pee Wee isn't a democrat.

 

[justoffal]

We could see them if there were any.
Nukes are like a big huge beacon in the upper orbit or LEO...and EVERYONE can see them. Every ballistic missile is instantly watched....Russia's newest and fastest missile (used on Ukraine) is just a ballistic missile and instantly destroyed by Patriots missile systems.

So, nope....there are not any nukes floating up in the sky currently.

But.....there are currently grifting assholes down in DC trying to scare the country into restarting the money laundry.....they must be getting behind on their yacht payments.

 

[JohnDB]

But.....there are currently grifting assholes down in DC trying to scare the country into restarting the money laundry.....they must be getting behind on their yacht payments.

Well the threat of nukes in orbit is a real problem. Because it will destroy ALL satellites up there.
Satellites are not cheap by any stretch of the imagination. Expensive to build, Expensive to put in orbit, and necessary for so much of daily life.

And it's not just the USA with satellites in orbit. Most every nation has a satellite system in space for communications and various data. Shipping will come to a complete stop. Millions of cargo vessels....millions of airplanes all grounded due to a lack of navigation.
Getting the picture yet?

 

[bendog]

Thread is silly because the whole point of SDI was for the US to put nukes into space.

{,,,
The Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI), nicknamed the "Star Wars program", was a proposed missile defense system intended to protect the United States from attack by ballistic strategic nuclear weapons (intercontinental ballistic missiles and submarine-launched ballistic missiles). The concept was announced on March 23, 1983, by President Ronald Reagan,[1] a vocal critic of the doctrine of mutually assured destruction (MAD), which he described as a "suicide pact". Reagan called upon American scientists and engineers to develop a system that would render nuclear weapons obsolete.[2] Elements of the program reemerged in 2019 with the Space Development Agency (SDA).[3]

The Strategic Defense Initiative Organization (SDIO) was set up in 1984 within the US Department of Defense to oversee development. A wide array of advanced weapon concepts, including lasers,[4][5] particle beam weapons, and ground and space-based missile systems were studied, along with various sensor, command and control, and high-performance computer systems that would be needed to control a system consisting of hundreds of combat centers and satellites spanning the entire globe and involved in a very short battle. The United States held a significant advantage in the field of comprehensive advanced missile defense systems through decades of extensive research and testing; a number of these concepts and obtained technologies and insights were transferred to subsequent programs.
...}

Claiming SDI was defensive was an obvious like since particle beams, lasers, etc., never were able to defend against incoming nukes.
So the reality is that SDI actually was about putting nukes into space. In theory they could be used as a nuclear ABM system, but in reality they were just a treat of retaliation.

{...
Physicists Hans Bethe and Richard Garwin, who worked with Edward Teller on both the atomic bomb and hydrogen bomb at Los Alamos, claimed a laser defense shield was unfeasible. They said that a defensive system was costly and difficult to build yet simple to destroy, and claimed that the Soviets could easily use thousands of decoys to overwhelm it during a nuclear attack. They believed that the only way to stop the threat of nuclear war was through diplomacy and dismissed the idea of a technical solution to the Cold War, saying that a defense shield could be viewed as threatening because it would limit or destroy Soviet offensive capabilities while leaving the American offense intact. In March 1984, Bethe coauthored a 106-page report for the Union of Concerned Scientists that concluded "the X-ray laser offers no prospect of being a useful component in a system for ballistic missile defense."[99]
...}

It was SDI that was illegal and tried to weaponize space.

I don't agree with an analogy between Reagan's SDI and what Russia seems up to. "Reagan's idea" was to somehow use lasers or "shoot em down" somehow before the Soviet nukes launched ballistically imploded on the US.

Why Reagan's 'Star Wars' Defense Plan Remained Science Fiction | HISTORY

Reagan said he wanted to avoid nuclear Armageddon, critics called the Strategic Defense Initiative far-fetched and expensive.

www.history.com

But as the link alludes to ... it wouldn't work, probably not even today. And Reagan just spun another folksy tale. But this was in his second term, when Reagan's advisors initally said "let Reagan be Reagan," only to be terrified when Reagan literally did offer to ban nukes if Gorby went along, which considering Russia was losing it's conventional arms advantage, Gorby couldn't do ... even if he'd wanted.

Star Wars gave Reagan the means to start a new arms race, and whether the thing worked was irrelevant, because Russia couldn't ignore the possibility , nor could Russia afford to try and build one because ..... with the advent of post-industrial economies, Russia couldn't economically compete with the US and ..... "we win they lose."

IF Putin is really putting warheads and delivery systems in place in outer space, that's a pretty low budget nuclear escalation.

And now matter what the US should do, Trump will tell Shorty to sit the fk down.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

If putin was smart, he'd just fly some balloons over the country.

 

[justoffal]

Well the threat of nukes in orbit is a real problem. Because it will destroy ALL satellites up there.
Satellites are not cheap by any stretch of the imagination. Expensive to build, Expensive to put in orbit, and necessary for so much of daily life.

And it's not just the USA with satellites in orbit. Most every nation has a satellite system in space for communications and various data. Shipping will come to a complete stop. Millions of cargo vessels....millions of airplanes all grounded due to a lack of navigation.
Getting the picture yet?

Yes I understand the gravity of satellite loss
I also understand the corruption of elected officials. I'm sure there is something to be concerned about but then again there Always has been one thing or another.

 

[JohnDB]

Yes I understand the gravity of satellite loss
I also understand the corruption of elected officials. I'm sure there is something to be concerned about but then again there Always has been one thing or another.

This is WHY choosing a leader is a serious business. Going along with a woman who gets half naked and sings about her bad choices in men....not a good idea.

 

[task0778]

I would hope we are telling the Ruskies in no uncertain terms that the day they put up a weapon in space (EMP or not) we will immediately shoot it down. And the Chinese or anybody else. No questions, no discussion, no compromise.

 

[justoffal]

This is WHY choosing a leader is a serious business. Going along with a woman who gets half naked and sings about her bad choices in men....not a good idea.

If it was such a serious business ( I think it is) then I would expect a more rigorous preselection process. One that doesn't produce the parade of clowns, morons and perverts we are currently dealing with.

 

[JohnDB]

If it was such a serious business ( I think it is) then I would expect a more rigorous preselection process. One that doesn't produce the parade of clowns, morons and perverts we are currently dealing with.

Which is a problem with today's media. It's sold on sensationalism instead of truth in order to gain readership/viewership.

Prime example is Tucker Carlson. He regularly tells half truths of what people want to hear instead of the whole truth. IE that Ukraine killed an American Journalist. The truth is the guy was making videos about how to purchase an underage prostitute in Ukraine until the war broke out and then began feeding Russia with military troop and equipment movements with "broadcasts". He had been repeatedly warned to stop. Then they imprisoned him and took away his internet and cell phone....which then he caught pneumonia and despite the best treatments they had the man died from pneumonia. But according to Tucker...."Ukraine killed an American Journalist".
The sound byte carries weight and gains viewers but the truth gets ignored. Tucker is in it for Tucker...not for the truth.

 

[justoffal]

Which is a problem with today's media. It's sold on sensationalism instead of truth in order to gain readership/viewership.

Prime example is Tucker Carlson. He regularly tells half truths of what people want to hear instead of the whole truth. IE that Ukraine killed an American Journalist. The truth is the guy was making videos about how to purchase an underage prostitute in Ukraine until the war broke out and then began feeding Russia with military troop and equipment movements with "broadcasts". He had been repeatedly warned to stop. Then they imprisoned him and took away his internet and cell phone....which then he caught pneumonia and despite the best treatments they had the man died from pneumonia. But according to Tucker...."Ukraine killed an American Journalist".
The sound byte carries weight and gains viewers but the truth gets ignored. Tucker is in it for Tucker...not for the truth.

Sounds like we are well rid of the POS...

 

[JohnDB]

Sounds like we are well rid of the POS...

Unfortunately we still have Tucker telling us how wonderful life is in Russia...

 

[justoffal]

Unfortunately we still have Tucker telling us how wonderful life is in Russia...

I know very little about the place. Massive alcoholism, poor quality of life..... Low wages.

Other than that I Russo-illiterate

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

If Russia set off an EMP in space above the US every electronic circuit would be fried.
No iPhones, no TV, no computers, how's that for a start?
Not to mention no ICBMs...

You need to learn a little more about EMP. A nuclear explosion in space does nothing but release a lot of radiation as there is nothing to conduct the force, i.e. no atmosphere. ICBMs could not care less about EMP as they are below ground and hardened. SLBMs are also immune from the effects. An EMP attack would result in World War III with nukes, so they have no reason to try.

 

[22lcidw]

Which is a problem with today's media. It's sold on sensationalism instead of truth in order to gain readership/viewership.

Prime example is Tucker Carlson. He regularly tells half truths of what people want to hear instead of the whole truth. IE that Ukraine killed an American Journalist. The truth is the guy was making videos about how to purchase an underage prostitute in Ukraine until the war broke out and then began feeding Russia with military troop and equipment movements with "broadcasts". He had been repeatedly warned to stop. Then they imprisoned him and took away his internet and cell phone....which then he caught pneumonia and despite the best treatments they had the man died from pneumonia. But according to Tucker...."Ukraine killed an American Journalist".
The sound byte carries weight and gains viewers but the truth gets ignored. Tucker is in it for Tucker...not for the truth.

You seem to think the people who spew politics are 50/50. Not true. It is approximately 95/5 Pro Prog. The Prog side lies every day. They are so dead inside; they show no emotion at all unless the lie is outside an already outside of the box issue because they cannot hold it in. Just reading all Prog news on the net...Russia should have no ships left. 75% of its fighter jets gone. Most of their field artillery gone. Massive casualties with their homeland affected from the war. Modern weapons depleted to concerning levels. The people in revolution in the home country. So, all of this technology destroyed they are sending up nuclear weapons into space.

 

[kyzr]

You need to learn a little more about EMP. A nuclear explosion in space does nothing but release a lot of radiation as there is nothing to conduct the force, i.e. no atmosphere. ICBMs could not care less about EMP as they are below ground and hardened. SLBMs are also immune from the effects. An EMP attack would result in World War III with nukes, so they have no reason to try.

True, I'm no EMP expert, but I do know that an EMP is designed to fry electronics. I don't know if or how US ICBMs are hardened. You are correct that sea based ICBMs would always be functional.

Electromagnetic pulse - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

A high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapon is a NEMP warhead designed to be detonated far above the Earth's surface. The explosion releases a blast of gamma rays into the mid-stratosphere, which ionizes as a secondary effect and the resultant energetic free electrons interact with the Earth's magnetic field to produce a much stronger EMP than is normally produced in the denser air at lower altitudes.

 

[d0gbreath]

Well the threat of nukes in orbit is a real problem. Because it will destroy ALL satellites up there.
Satellites are not cheap by any stretch of the imagination. Expensive to build, Expensive to put in orbit, and necessary for so much of daily life.

And it's not just the USA with satellites in orbit. Most every nation has a satellite system in space for communications and various data. Shipping will come to a complete stop. Millions of cargo vessels....millions of airplanes all grounded due to a lack of navigation.
Getting the picture yet?

I was under the impression that a nuke in space was designed to be launched to the surface for total war destruction. I don't think it's for popping up there to eradicate satellites in a large area. Although, that would be a possibility. We should tell them that we will not be pleased if they send one up into orbit. That it will be the last thing that they ever do.

 

[Vastator]

B

Which is a problem with today's media. It's sold on sensationalism instead of truth in order to gain readership/viewership.

Prime example is Tucker Carlson. He regularly tells half truths of what people want to hear instead of the whole truth. IE that Ukraine killed an American Journalist. The truth is the guy was making videos about how to purchase an underage prostitute in Ukraine until the war broke out and then began feeding Russia with military troop and equipment movements with "broadcasts". He had been repeatedly warned to stop. Then they imprisoned him and took away his internet and cell phone....which then he caught pneumonia and despite the best treatments they had the man died from pneumonia. But according to Tucker...."Ukraine killed an American Journalist".
The sound byte carries weight and gains viewers but the truth gets ignored. Tucker is in it for Tucker...not for the truth.

Bullshit.

 

[skye]

so predictable.....