Political Forums  

Go Back   Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Forum > Political Talk > Europe


Thanks Tree1Thanks
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old November 11th, 2015, 02:25 PM   #11
Banned
 
coke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: nunya
Posts: 12,580
ICBM's, crashing down from sub orbit at speeds impossible to intercept. Although there has been great improvement in that area. See Satellite shoot downs
coke is offline  
Old November 12th, 2015, 03:24 PM   #12
Senior Member
 
imaginethat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Western Slope, Colorado
Posts: 53,240
Quote:
Originally Posted by coke View Post
ICBM's, crashing down from sub orbit at speeds impossible to intercept. Although there has been great improvement in that area. See Satellite shoot downs
Except for the missile defense system protecting Moscow, which uses nuclear warheads, and the US Ground-Based Midcourse Defense System, no ICBM defenses exist.
imaginethat is offline  
Old November 12th, 2015, 03:25 PM   #13
Senior Member
 
imaginethat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Western Slope, Colorado
Posts: 53,240
Quote:
Originally Posted by LongWinded View Post
I don't know. We sure have a lot of money for CIA moves in the world that no one accounts for at all. Maybe he has a valid point?
Putin might pay you for such statements.
imaginethat is offline  
Old November 12th, 2015, 03:33 PM   #14
Senior Member
 
imaginethat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Western Slope, Colorado
Posts: 53,240
Quote:
Originally Posted by RNG View Post
I had long thought a nuclear armed missile firing submarine could get close to an enemy's shore and do a sub-sea launch minimizing the possibility of being brought down by a missile defense system.

I think the nuke torpedoes would be more a terrorist type threat or a danger to naval bases than even being able to devastate Washington.

Would a nuke hit on any coastal city really hurt the military infrastructure of the US? And the bulk of the US MAD capability is well inland.

Edit: This was posted for discussion, not as a claim to any kind of military or strategic expertise.
Yields for a 2,000 lb. warhead range from 1-5 megatons. NYC could be toasted, and Boston, Miami, London, many, many cities.
imaginethat is offline  
Old November 12th, 2015, 04:04 PM   #15
RNG
Senior Member
 
RNG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: LA LA Land North
Posts: 24,253
Quote:
Originally Posted by imaginethat View Post
Yields for a 2,000 lb. warhead range from 1-5 megatons. NYC could be toasted, and Boston, Miami, London, many, many cities.
I agree, but my point was that it wouldn't harm the US military counterstrike capability.
RNG is offline  
Old November 12th, 2015, 05:09 PM   #16
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: massachusetts
Posts: 7,780
Quote:
Originally Posted by imaginethat View Post
Genius. Who needs ICBMs?

It's a Mirror story, but my interpreter listened to the video and confirm's the Mirror's story.



Russia's nuclear torpedo plan to bypass Nato missile shield revealed after broadcaster forgets to blur out secret document - Mirror Online
Put a nuclear warhead on a super cavitating torpedo, no one is going to stop that.

Last edited by goober; November 12th, 2015 at 05:13 PM.
goober is offline  
Old November 12th, 2015, 08:11 PM   #17
Banned
 
coke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: nunya
Posts: 12,580
Quote:
Originally Posted by imaginethat View Post
Except for the missile defense system protecting Moscow, which uses nuclear warheads, and the US Ground-Based Midcourse Defense System, no ICBM defenses exist.
I don't even consider the Moscow nuke defense as viable. At best it saves structures. That's at best. Its basically a system to explode nukes in the atmosphere above their heads to minimize the damage of oncoming nukes. Its, almost a were going to nuke ourselves before you can idea.

The GMD system isn't much better. Its been flawed from the start.

Quote:
June 15/14. The LA Times writes a feature about the GMD system, whose $40 billion price tag and 8/16 success record (including just 3/8 successes since becoming operational in 2004) don’t inspire favorable treatment. That record suggests that the USA would need to volley about 4 missiles at each incoming missile, in order to have a high probability of success. Moreover:


“About a third of the kill vehicles now in use — the exact number is classified — are the same model that failed in the 2010 tests, according to people familiar with the system who spoke on condition of anonymity. That model has yet to intercept a target…. interceptors used in test flights burn up when they reenter the atmosphere or are lost in the ocean…. some of the system’s problems can be traced to the kill vehicles’ [inertial measurement unit]…. Scientists suspect that intense vibration during the interceptors’ ascent is the cause of some of the test failures…. It could take years of additional engineering work to solve this and other technical problems in the kill vehicles, scientists said.
Quote:
Lehner, the Missile Defense Agency spokesman, said vibrations were successfully dampened in a January 2013 flight test [that]… did not involve an attempt to intercept a target…. Engineers who have worked with the system acknowledge that because each kill vehicle is unique, even a successful test might not predict the performance of interceptors launched in combat.”
Missile Defense: Next Steps for the USA?s GMD

In February of 2008, I was on the USNS Observation Island when operation Burnt Frost took place. Now, I am not saying that the ship was involved with it. I am just saying we had weekend at the pier in Pearl Harbor right after it was done.
coke is offline  
Old November 12th, 2015, 10:20 PM   #18
Senior Member
 
Twisted Sister's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Brown Township, Ohio
Posts: 9,633
Quote:
Originally Posted by coke View Post
I don't even consider the Moscow nuke defense as viable. At best it saves structures. That's at best. Its basically a system to explode nukes in the atmosphere above their heads to minimize the damage of oncoming nukes. Its, almost a were going to nuke ourselves before you can idea.

The GMD system isn't much better. Its been flawed from the start.




Missile Defense: Next Steps for the USA?s GMD

In February of 2008, I was on the USNS Observation Island when operation Burnt Frost took place. Now, I am not saying that the ship was involved with it. I am just saying we had weekend at the pier in Pearl Harbor right after it was done.
I just did a quick google search and found that Operation Burnt Frost used a Standard missile. My guided missile destroyer used a Tartar missile with an extended range of 22 miles that evolved into the Standard missile before I got out. Back then we used semi-passive missile navigation and active navigation missiles were being deployed when I got out in 78 after eight years active duty service. Our missile launcher was lovingly called a one arm bandit and the missile was called a bird.

edit: Weekend on the pier is not too bad when they bring the free beer trucks to the pier like they did way back in the day. Probably not done today due to political correctness.

Last edited by Twisted Sister; November 12th, 2015 at 11:00 PM.
Twisted Sister is offline  
Reply

  Defending The Truth Political Forum > Political Forum > Political Talk > Europe

Tags
224, blames, conspiracies, crash, deaths, egypt, media, plane, russian, veers



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The Right-Wing Media's Failed White House Log Conspiracies Mrs. CJ Parker Current Events 3 May 22nd, 2013 07:27 AM
The Right-Wing Media's Failed White House Log Conspiracies Mrs. CJ Parker Current Events 0 May 21st, 2013 03:28 PM
Plane Crash in Austin Texas.. Act of Terrorism? RidinHighSpeeds Current Events 33 February 23rd, 2010 10:15 AM
Plane Crash in Austin Texas.. Act of Terrorism? Political Talk 0 December 31st, 1969 04:00 PM


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed



Copyright © 2005-2013 Defending The Truth. All rights reserved.