Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Stop trying to scare people, and deal in facts.
"such as cities" as opposed to say, oh heck, the "NATO HANDBOOK ON THE MEDICAL ASPECTS OF NBC DEFENSIVE OPERATIONS", i.e. "ARMY FIELD MANUAL 8-9 NAVY MEDICAL PUBLICATION 5059 AIR FORCE JOINT MANUAL 44-151" for example, which is obviously concerned mostly with maintaining deployed troop morale (self-propaganda).In nuclear warfare, air bursts are used against soft targets (i.e. lacking the hardened construction required to survive overpressure from a nuclear explosion) such as cities in countervalue targeting, or airfields, radar systems and mobile ICBMs in counterforce targeting.
I think it's because they don't REALLY believe their own rhetoric about Putin resorting to nukes. IMO, he is FULLY capable of taking the step of using a low-yield device to flip the field in Russia's favor IF NATO came into the picture against Russia. In fact, he has been crystal clear in his statements of when and how he would deploy nukes. He sees them as a viable part of his conventional force posture. Just imagine a 5 or 10 KT airburst over a NATO airbase like Incirlik in Turkey.
The fallout would be negligible, the base would be removed, totally, and NATO would be left with the choice of escalating to the use of their own nukes, OR deciding to take a step back and freeze the conflict in place to keep things from spiraling out of control.
He has pushed this option for many years now and has a 10:1 advantage in such low-yield, tactical nukes.
Yeah, but what if some comedian cracks a joke about your celebrity wife's hair cut in public?When Fukushima happened. I said we should save some words for extreme circumstances. Like Catastrophic. Catastrophic is not finding a flat tire on your car. It isn’t Catastrophic when your boyfriend, or girlfriend dumps you for someone else. It isn’t catastrophic when you break a nail, or a shoestring.
We're not anywhere close to heading into a nuclear war, that kind of fearmongering is precisely why we're in the shape we are today.
Putin's an evil bastard but he's not stupid nor is he crazy, he knows that using nukes means the end of Russia, his friends, his family and himself.
He just thought the nuclear blackmail was going to work again and finally the Euro's are calling his bluff.
As a result we've watched him destroy his own army, prove how ineffective they are, and he's drained his war stocks badly of vehicles including aircraft, armor, ordinance, ammunition and everything else he'd need in a real war.
The sanctions will bankrupt him personally, and send his nation into a deep, deep, recession they won't be able to recover from for years and that means he won't be able to rebuild his military.
One of his biggest exports is weapons and their failures to take Ukraine militarily are going to badly hurt those arms sales and the Euro's are taking away his ability to blackmail them with threats of turning off the gas in the winter.
Biden is responsible for this invasion as much as Putin with a good share going to his former boss with both of them refusing to provide Ukraine with what they needed to prevent Russia from being willing to attempt it.
Only after his poll numbers hit their lowest point yet after the invasion began did someone in the WH kick him in the ass and convince him that if he wanted to save his presidency he'd better get off the fence and start sending whatever we could to at least give the pretense the US still has a leadership role in the world and that we're willing to stand up with smaller nations when totalitarian bullies want to engage in wars of conquest.
Trump on the other hand spent four years warning all of Europe this day would come if they did not divorce themselves from their dependency on Russian Energy imports. They laughed at him of course.
Who's laughing now?
Trump was the devil for daring to tell the Euro's that the US could no longer be the financier and primary force in NATO so they'd better start living up to their obligations and they were all insulted and all but chased him out of the room, then openly derided him behind his back.
Who's laughing now?
Trump was labeled a warmonger who would star WWIII standing up to Putin and Kim, Solemani, and Al Baghdadi.
Yet when we directly confronted Russia in Syria and bombed the shit out of their base and assets used to deploy chemical weapons on civilians he was labeled a fool and dangerous.
Yet Putin did nothing because he knew he could not win.
When a battalion of Russian Troops started an attack on our own troops in Syria , Trump gave them the greenlight to take whatever actions they deemed necessary to stop that threat.
Two hours later, that threat had been completely eliminated.
What did Putin do?
We'll be fine.
I have seen that video many times, and each time I am reminded of the ending of "War Games".
How about a nice game of chess?
No link. No source. Is it credible or is the source being concealed for some strange reason.View attachment 624845
Russian economy already has recuperated from the first panic sales while American and European economies are suffering from the higher fuel prices.
The Democrats try to beat enemy with carrots and feed friends with sticks.
The USA need to gain a credible military solutions for enemies and keep a credible currency for friends.
What is more difficult - to explain people why the UK shouldn't send their soldiers in another continental conflict, why HMNB Clyde was destroyed by a Russian nuke and now the UK have no chances to win a nuclear war against Russia, or really recuperate British economy after the Russian limited counter-value nuclear strike, killed, say, 50% of the British population and destroyed all British major cities?If Putin uses these “battlefield Nukes” then Nuclear war is the only result. Period.
The difference between Strategic and Tactical when it comes to Nuclear Weapons is a fantasy. Let’s be honest. Just for a moment.
Let’s say that a nuke goes off over a camp with British Soldiers. The leadership in London will not be able to go and explain to the people that their sons died by nuclear fire because of a tactical nuke. They would be torn to shreds by the public in a minute. The same would be true here. Nobody will accept that the nuke was Tactical, not Strategic. All they would hear is Nuke. Think January 6 was bad? Think the riots in all the cities was a bad thing? That would be a minor argument at a family picnic by comparison.
Any leader, anyone. They would have to respond. That is the reality when dealing with Nukes. It is the forbidden weapon. You just don’t use them. Using one is pulling the trigger on Armageddon. America would respond. Britain would respond. France, would respond. Everyone would respond. Nukes would fly.
But lets say you believe Biden wouldn’t. Would Boris Johnson sit on his hands knowing that he would be out of office before the day is out, and someone who would pull the trigger will be the next PM in a day? Would France? Hell France has riots over taxes on Gasoline going up a penny. The French PM would have to fire his weapons.
Someone would fire, everyone would know that, and so everyone would fire.
Putin pulling the trigger on even one nuke, is the match on the fuse. The world explodes right after. And frankly, it’s time.
We won’t live in peace. We won’t agree to disagree. We won’t leave each other alone. It’s no longer possible to live in harmony. We scream and shout that we must destroy our fellows categorizing them as enemies. Over nothing.
When Fukushima happened. I said we should save some words for extreme circumstances. Like Catastrophic. Catastrophic is not finding a flat tire on your car. It isn’t Catastrophic when your boyfriend, or girlfriend dumps you for someone else. It isn’t catastrophic when you break a nail, or a shoestring.
Enemy is another of those words. Political opponents are not enemies. Enemies should be saved for when you are engaged in hostile actions. In other words, wars.
Russia is rapidly becoming an enemy for world peace. And the world must stand firm, and step up to stop this.
No link. No source. Is it credible or is the source being concealed for some strange reason.
www.foxbusiness.com
What is more difficult - to explain people why the UK shouldn't send their soldiers in another continental conflict, why HMNB Clyde was destroyed by a Russian nuke and now the UK have no chances to win a nuclear war against Russia, or really recuperate British economy after the Russian limited counter-value nuclear strike, killed, say, 50% of the British population and destroyed all British major cities?
Words are cheap. Infrastructure is expensive.
What falls back?One isn't, hundreds or thousands adds up to a whole lot of nuclear contamination when it falls back to earth.
When the West had an advantage - the Russians decided to retreat. When the choice is to lost Poland, or to lost 30 million Russians (Americans) both sides will decide to lost Poland. If the choice is to lost Crimea/Alaska or to fight a battle which will cost at least 30 million Russians/Americans killed - both sides will decide to fight the war.Turn it around. Imagine that it was the Wedt that had the advantage. And what would happen to the Russian leadership of the table was turned.
We don’t need to imagine do we? The Romanovs can offer their testimony can’t they?
If Putin uses these “battlefield Nukes” then Nuclear war is the only result. Period.
The difference between Strategic and Tactical when it comes to Nuclear Weapons is a fantasy. Let’s be honest. Just for a moment.
Let’s say that a nuke goes off over a camp with British Soldiers. The leadership in London will not be able to go and explain to the people that their sons died by nuclear fire because of a tactical nuke. They would be torn to shreds by the public in a minute. The same would be true here. Nobody will accept that the nuke was Tactical, not Strategic. All they would hear is Nuke. Think January 6 was bad? Think the riots in all the cities was a bad thing? That would be a minor argument at a family picnic by comparison.
Any leader, anyone. They would have to respond. That is the reality when dealing with Nukes. It is the forbidden weapon. You just don’t use them. Using one is pulling the trigger on Armageddon. America would respond. Britain would respond. France, would respond. Everyone would respond. Nukes would fly.
But lets say you believe Biden wouldn’t. Would Boris Johnson sit on his hands knowing that he would be out of office before the day is out, and someone who would pull the trigger will be the next PM in a day? Would France? Hell France has riots over taxes on Gasoline going up a penny. The French PM would have to fire his weapons.
Someone would fire, everyone would know that, and so everyone would fire.
Putin pulling the trigger on even one nuke, is the match on the fuse. The world explodes right after. And frankly, it’s time.
We won’t live in peace. We won’t agree to disagree. We won’t leave each other alone. It’s no longer possible to live in harmony. We scream and shout that we must destroy our fellows categorizing them as enemies. Over nothing.
When Fukushima happened. I said we should save some words for extreme circumstances. Like Catastrophic. Catastrophic is not finding a flat tire on your car. It isn’t Catastrophic when your boyfriend, or girlfriend dumps you for someone else. It isn’t catastrophic when you break a nail, or a shoestring.
Enemy is another of those words. Political opponents are not enemies. Enemies should be saved for when you are engaged in hostile actions. In other words, wars.
Russia is rapidly becoming an enemy for world peace. And the world must stand firm, and step up to stop this.
I would imagine that we’d have constantly upgraded the system.
Wouldn’t it be terrific if we could pretty much fire lasers from satellites at incoming targets which could detect missile launches upon ignition? Back ‘em up with upgraded ANTI BALLISTIC MISSLES?
What falls back?
Many believe that the US has discontinued use but they still keep the B61 in the EU Armories.
It never died, that itself is a misnomer.
PATRIOT, THAAD, SM-2, SM-3, SM-6, GBI, there are functioning systems that are based on that program.
Most interest in the "space based" aspect died when the ASM-135 ASAT was a proven technology. But by that point most of it was already under derision because of misconceptions, but the research into kinetic kill weapons continued (and that was always the main focus of the program).
But LASERs will never be a working system. It is simply not workable, other than in movies.
Your last sentence is unduly pessimistic.It never died, that itself is a misnomer.
PATRIOT, THAAD, SM-2, SM-3, SM-6, GBI, there are functioning systems that are based on that program.
Most interest in the "space based" aspect died when the ASM-135 ASAT was a proven technology. But by that point most of it was already under derision because of misconceptions, but the research into kinetic kill weapons continued (and that was always the main focus of the program).
But LASERs will never be a working system. It is simply not workable, other than in movies.
It never died, that itself is a misnomer.
PATRIOT, THAAD, SM-2, SM-3, SM-6, GBI, there are functioning systems that are based on that program.
Most interest in the "space based" aspect died when the ASM-135 ASAT was a proven technology. But by that point most of it was already under derision because of misconceptions, but the research into kinetic kill weapons continued (and that was always the main focus of the program).
But LASERs will never be a working system. It is simply not workable, other than in movies.
