Russian submarine with nuclear warheads headed for the US coast

Well hell I'm not surprised. Just Camp Bondsteel which is the main US Army base in Europe and also NATO central command....built in KOSOVO. Now you know why the U.S. screwed Yugoslavia.

You want some more education? :::

SO how many times have you been to Ukraine and Russia? Uh, a big fat zero?

You just said the NAZIS are the good guys. AZOV Battalion...which is Ukraine special forces....are NAZIS.








Need more? Do you understand what these are? Do you know what the national colors/flag/emblem of Ukraine is?

Russia isn't invading the EU. Russia can simply cut off their gas supply if they want to do harm to the EU. But if anyone is stupid enough to use nukes against Russia, you're going to have a boatload of hypersonic nuclear missiles landing in your backyard in less time than you can get your BigMac in a McDonald's drive though.

Maybe you have a death wish?

 

I saw that interview. I've probably watched FOX no more than 10 times (for less than 15 minutes each time) in the last year. I wanted to reach into the TV and pinch that idiot's head off. He knew nothing about Ukraine. Nothing. He's a fool that was probably promised kickbacks by a military contractor. Absolutely disgraceful.

Yeah, the good guys:

 

The claim that Ukrainians are Nazis is Russian propaganda meant to demonize Russia's victims.

Good. Because if they do there are a bunch of new tactical nukes waiting to eliminate the invasion.

We have more than enough nukes to harm Russia equally as badly as they harm us.

 

US attack submarines are still tracking it.

 

How many more pictures do you want me to post of NAZIS in central Kiev? How many more NAZI flags do you need to see hanging on official buildings? Respectfully, are you blind? You've never been to Ukraine.

 

accusing someone of being Nazis is lazy thinking.

 

Not knowing anything about the people in power in Ukraine is lazy altogether. I can post another 100 photos of NAZIS in Kiev and you'd still come back with the same lame comment. Or maybe you don't know a damn thing about Ukraine, where those photos are taken, the national symbol of Ukraine, the national flag of Ukraine, etc.

I've stood in the same places some of those pictures were taken. If that happened here, you'd be saying "look at those NAZIS". So don't give me that ****.

Furthermore, the Ukrainian military is comprised of a NAZI battalion. A Government endorsed and supported NAZI battalion. You can't refute that.

 

The ABMs have nothing to do with Iran - that is a propaganda nonsense trope that everyone knows is false - but it matters not who the US claims the ABMs or for .. they threaten Russia - by destabilizing nucler detente' If Russia were to put ABM's on the US border .. the cries from the Pentagon - akin to childbirth - would be heard round the world.

Your claim that the US is prepared for Russian Subs . is what is "Bogus" . We have had subs pop up right beside our carriers .. and in the Gulf .. of which we were completely unaware.... and even if we did know where they were .. they can lanch prior to us being able to do anything about it.

Then you finish with the most loopy doopy comment of all .. one that has been addressed at least 5 or 6 times already .. so why are circling back to this vomit as if it hasn't been addressed. What part of MAD .. do you not understand. Is it that you do not understand what MAD means ? "Mutually Assured Destruction" - or is it that you did not realize that this applies to Russia as well.

In a full scale war we will be sending the ICBM's .. F35 with tactical nukes is pointless in such a situation. What is this "Equal Damage" nonsense? Both sides will be completely annihillated.

Your brain is not comprehending "MAD" What part of no Power - No communication - no radar - no GPS - the entire US turned into a radioactive dead zone - do you not understand.

 

Sure it could .. just not over the entire US .. would need more than one sub for that.

 

It seems like some of these folks actually do .. saying things like

defending the use of tactical nukes.

So lets sort out this logic .. Should the Russians invade .. we should hit them with tactical nukes .. because when Russia responds ..annihilating the US .. we will also annihillate them.

Good plan.

 

An attack on another nations military forces is an act of war.
How wars start: Fort Sumpter, Pearl Harbor, Lexington, the assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand, crossing the Bug ....

 

Government is never a "good guy". Alas.

 

Government is never a "good guy

 

MSM report on WW III: "Urban Renewal"

 

Certainly not in Texas these days, where extremists have taken over and instituted some American Sharia.

 

What happened to "No Malarkey!"?

 

The ABMs in Europe are there for Iran, and only Iran.

The ABMs do not threaten Russia or nuclear detente in any way whatsoever.

The only reason why Russia opposes the European ABMs is because Russia wants Iran to be able to blackmail Europe with the threat of nuclear attack.

That has little to do with our attack submarines, which are what would be sinking those Russian (or Chinese, depending on who we are at war with) subs.

Who says that we would wait for them to start to launch before sinking them?

If we get to the point where Russia gives an order to their subs to launch nukes, that order will be transmitted to an ocean that is already devoid of Russian subs.

I am aware of our ability to destroy Russia.

That is incorrect. We will not use ICBMs to dislodge a Russian invasion of the EU. That would kill tens of millions of our European allies and leave the EU contaminated with fallout.

These new tactical nukes will land direct hits with low yields, minimizing collateral damage. And they get most of their yield from fusion so they will leave little fallout.

We will hold our ICBMs in their silos until we detect a nuclear attack that is aimed directly at those ICBMs. Then we will launch those ICBMs at the entire Russian military (both nuclear and conventional) before the attack arrives. The attack on our ICBMs will destroy empty holes in the ground, and the Russian military will largely cease to exist.

It would be infinitely better IMO if we had mobile ICBMs instead of silo based ones. But so long as we keep them in silos, that is the proper way for us to use them in a war.

We will scale our attacks on Russia to ensure that any damage that Russia does to the US and EU is also done to Russia.

For example if Russia destroys two EU cities and kills three million Europeans, we will destroy two Russian cities of the same size and try to kill the same number of Russians.

We will not needlessly escalate beyond what Russia has done to the US and EU. The only exception to that will be if our ICBMs are attacked and we launch the lot of them before the attack arrives. But otherwise we will scale our retaliation proportionately.

If Russia completely annihilates either the US or EU, we will indeed completely annihilate Russia.

I understand just fine. If they do that to the US or EU, we will do the same to them.

It works for me.

 

1) repeating a false narrative over and over like a parrot .. will not make that narrative any less false.

2) "Fusion - so little fall out" This is 100% false ..on your level of understanding of how the bomb works .. and 200% false with respect to fallout .. simply no clue what you are talking about .. your just "WRONG" - demonstrably so .. six ways to Sunday .. I am sorry to say .. do test us on this one ... Please - as it will be much fun .. for the others.

Now "being wrong" once in awhile happens to the best of us - all make mistakes - .. so do not dispair as you are in good company - remember however that it fool who refuses correction (2) in particular, and we don't want to go into that group ... heads up .. I was in grade 8 when I made gunpowder .. then I went on to become a chemist .. studying quantum in my 4th year .. shrodinger wave equations .. not that any of this is required .. but probably not a bad idea to do a little google before responding .. or ask Dayton to explain it to you.

I did read all what you wrote .. knocking head against wall much of the time .. the response to this will cover it.

There is no "Scaling" of the attack .. there no such thing as some moderate escalation - and your exception is monstrous nonsense .. as it is not the exception .. but the rule but not in the way you say so thats even wierd. You seriously don't understand how this works.

There is no attacking our ICBMs - even when our ICBMs are being attacked.. there is your first riddle. Did you not comprehend a thing I wrote about what happens in a nuclear attack ... or perhaps just did not understand.

1) Prior to attack -- communication gone - GPS gone - satellites taken out. --- ECM blast takes out the power infrastructure and electronics
Not a single bomb has hit - and we are already in the stone age .. not able to recover for a decade or two.

2) I will just use one sub .. launching 8 SLBM out of its 16 recreating this fictional "moderate escalation" narrative you have in head.

Note to self -- the time for an ICBM to get here from Russia is ~ 30 minutes. SLBM 10-15 minutes.

OK .. so you are commander and chief for the day .. have just been told that there are 8 SLBMs on the way - these were launched 5 minutes ago so you have 10 minutes to react .. then you are told that each of these SLBM's has 10 warheads .. each 10 times the bang of Hiroshima - so in total 80 independantly targetable locations in the US .. we don't know at this point as the SLBM has yet to separate. -- the equivalent of 800 Hiroshima's in yeild.

OK Boss .. your response is what -- Oh .. we will count out exactly that many megatons .. and respond in kind .. tit for tat .. and wait for the Russians to launch more before calculating our next launch. is this what you will do ?

The problem here is you claimed we would wait until our ICBM's are attacked before launching .. but with 8 minutes to go .. we don't know if any ..or which will be attacked .. as the Missile hasn't separated yet .. so there is never an opportunity to make such a decision .. you have to launch if you want to the russian nuke to hit an empty hole .. and you now have 7 minutes.

Same as above -- we will never be able to assess if Russia has completely annihillated us ... we will launch a full strike ... AS we are being attacked .. not after the bombs have hit

but hey .. as another mentioned .. you seem to want MAD to happen .. so good thing you are not in command .. and I question the command that you do have .. willing such a thing.

 

Reality is not a false narrative.

The ABMs are no threat to Russia.

The ABMs in Europe are there only for Iran.

Russia opposes the ABMs in Europe only because they want Iran to be able to blackmail the EU with the threat of nuclear attack.

I fully understand how nuclear weapons work. I know exactly what I am talking about. And I'm not wrong.

Dangerous fallout comes from fission. Bombs that produce very little fission, produce very little dangerous fallout.

Not every attack is of such a large scale that we would be unable to determine whether our ICBMs are under threat.

Of course if we found ourselves under a massive attack that seemed likely to target our ICBMs we would launch them. But if an attack is clearly small enough that we can tell that the ICBMs are not under threat we will not blindly escalate in that case.

And note that launching ICBMs doesn't mean all-out attack on Russian or Chinese cities.

Our ICBMs will be aimed at Russia's military (or China's, if that is who we are at war with). Most of their cities will remain intact as future targets for our bombers and ultimately SLBMs.

 

Repeating this state sponsored propaga
I fully understand how nuclear weapons work.

You have no clue what you are talking about .. you claimed that a Fusion bomb had very little fallout .. because the dangerous fallout comes from Fission. This is abject nonsense on steroids .. because a Fission is used to set off Fusion ... 2 bombs in one mate. So no.

One did not have to know that however, to know that Fusion Bombs aka hydrogen bombs create a massive amount of fallout .. ground bursts more-so than air. Did you not know that we have tested these things .. many many times ? .. would you like an example .. or continue to dig your grave further.. Told you mate .. you dead wrong .. "Little fallout" Sorry ...but .. yeah.. its one thing to make a mistake .. another to keep digging .. Its just going to get more pathetic as we go .. but do feel free to continue.

Which nuclear attack was not large scale ? What a docile comment completely void of substance .. did we have a bunch more after Hiro/Nagasaki ? ..

You were talking about missiles hitting empty silos in the US .. how would that occur ..in other than the limited attack which I described .. did you think Russia was going to send just one ? .. a little care package ..

Did you wish to address the limited attack scenario I put forward in any way shape or form .. or did you have another example from these other attacks that you seem to think happened .. ... I suggested 8 missiles .. half of of the 16 on a Russian Sub .. what did you have in mind .. to attack our missiles .. 4 ? .. shall we rerun the scenario with 4 ? in desperate hope that the scenario becomes less moronic ..and absurd ?

there comes a point in a convo where only Twisted Sister can save the day !

 

The only state sponsored propaganda here is Russia's claim that they find our ABMs threatening.

I know exactly what I am talking about.

No it isn't.

The primary does not cause much fallout. Most of the yield comes from the secondary.

I don't think there is a prerequisite for "knowing something that isn't true". Merely being wrong suffices.

Bombs that get almost all of their yield from fusion do not cause very much dangerous fallout at all.

I am intimately aware of our nuclear testing.

You are free to provide any example that you like.

I am not digging any grave.

Except, I'm not wrong.

Bombs that get almost all of their yield from fusion produce very little fallout.

Correct. At least when it comes to bombs that get almost all of their yield from fusion.

A single warhead fired at a single target would be an example of a nuclear attack that was small enough that we could determine that our ICBMs were not under threat.

We would launch our ICBMs before the incoming attack hit them.

I thought I did address it. I agreed that we would launch our ICBMs if we faced an attack that could plausibly be attacking our ICBMs.

 

Probably passed on of ours going the other way.

 

Kids...just say no...don't do drugs.

 

The day of reckoning has come .. where your claim gets "Crucified" and crying "No No No .. I know what I am talking about " five times in the same post will not save your demonstrably false claim(s)

1) The primary and secondary are together .. in the same bomb .. the bomb yeild .. is the bomb yeild .. and it is not "Very little Fallout" and if ground burst it is massive. Sorry mate .. Nail one .. you are dead wrong .. don't understand that a hydrogen bomb is both a fission and a fusion bomb in one. and what is this Primary -Secondary ?? the Fission creates the heat reaquired to set off Fusion .. so the Fission is the primary.. technically Nail 2 .. but we will count them both as one .. a really big Nail ..

2) you repeat the same claim twice .. and it is complete nonsense .. all thermonuclear bombs get almost all of their yeild from Fusion - and they produce huge fallout if detonated anywhere near ground or water .. There are no Hydrogen bombs that don't get almost all yeild from Fusion. Nail two and three You don't realize that all hydrogen bombs get most of their yeild from Fusion .. and

3) that these bombs have huge fallout if detonated near ground/water.

Castle Bravo - Fishermen 90 miles away were covered with radioactive ash .. radiation sickness .. one died .. area roughly 7000 Sq miles/KM? was contaminated. Islands having very high radiation levels for decades.. ground burst . . of course.

Crucified ... ouch ..

 

Correction, 27 seconds. 27 seconds from international waters to the White House.

That's not enough time to make a phone call. To be honest, it may as well be zero seconds....they won't see it coming nor have time to react.

Hypersonic missiles, they have them, we don't. Oh but don't worry, we got some B-52's to deliver some nukes according to all this nonsense posted above. Those Russkies don't have a chance. SMFH.