Read the news today, crapped my pants a little.

[barbos]

Read the news today, crapped my pants a little.

Our conclusions. Under the veil of an otherwise-legitimate warhead life-extension program, the US military has quietly engaged in a vast expansion of the killing power of the most numerous warhead in the US nuclear arsenal: the W76, deployed on the Navy’s ballistic missile submarines. This improvement in kill power means that all US sea-based warheads now have the capability to destroy hardened targets such as Russian missile silos, a capability previously reserved for only the highest-yield warheads in the US arsenal.

The capability upgrade has happened outside the attention of most government officials, who have been preoccupied with reducing nuclear warhead numbers. The result is a nuclear arsenal that is being transformed into a force that has the unambiguous characteristics of being optimized for surprise attacks against Russia and for fighting and winning nuclear wars. While the lethality and firepower of the US force has been greatly increased, the numbers of weapons in both US and Russian forces have decreased, resulting in a dramatic increase in the vulnerability of Russian nuclear forces to a US first strike. We estimate that the results of arms reductions with the increase in US nuclear capacity means that the US military can now destroy all of Russia’s ICBM silos using only about 20 percent of the warheads deployed on US land- and sea-based ballistic missiles.

With all that nuclear arsenal reduction in recent decades US now has nuclear first strike capability. Basically they can nuke Russia out completely.
And this is gonna kill us all. The only thing which could save us all is the fact that US can't do nothing about russian submarine based nukes, but russian generals are not sure they can rely on just that, so we are probably doomed anyway. Some glitch on radar screen and russians would have no choice but to launch everything at US and then US will launch everything at Russia.
This sucks.

forgot the link
http://thebulletin.org/how-us-nucle...tability-burst-height-compensating-super10578

 

[Keith&Co.]

Read the news today, crapped my pants a little.

Our conclusions.

WHo is 'our' and why should anyone give a toss about their conclusions?

With all that nuclear arsenal reduction in recent decades US now has nuclear first strike capability. Basically they can nuke Russia completely.

Gosh.
Now, who was it, some time in the last year, maintained that the US had been concentrating on precision vice size and that was a dead-end because Russia had nukes on trucks and trains that move around and the US could only get 1% of them even in a first-strike scenario?

The only thing which could save us all is the fact that US can't do nothing about russian submarine based nukes,

Nothing? Not quite 'nothing,' I would say. We have a lot of fast-attack boats out there shadowing them.
And they don't even have to wait for a glitch on the radar. If the tubes prssurize and the locking rings roll, the torpedo can't be too far away...

 

[untermensche]

The ever present threat of nuclear annihilation is something Americans seem to have forgotten about.

Out of sight, out of mind.

There is a high likelihood humans will destroy the species with a nuclear exchange.

Making human intelligence a lethal mutation.

 

[barbos]

The only thing which could save us all is the fact that US can't do nothing about russian submarine based nukes,

Nothing? Not quite 'nothing,' I would say. We have a lot of fast-attack boats out there shadowing them.
And they don't even have to wait for a glitch on the radar. If the tubes prssurize and the locking rings roll, the torpedo can't be too far away...

This is a kind of thinking that could kill us all.

 

[Keith&Co.]

Nothing? Not quite 'nothing,' I would say. We have a lot of fast-attack boats out there shadowing them.
And they don't even have to wait for a glitch on the radar. If the tubes prssurize and the locking rings roll, the torpedo can't be too far away...

This is a kind of thinking that could kill us all.

Sounds kind of alarmist, really.

What's your source, though? WHO came to these conclusions?
Why is it in the news?

ETA: Ah. You added a link.

That's not 'the news,' though, is it? It's a group of people feeling alarmed about the nuclear threat.

And some of their conclusions assume that we break quite a few treaty points.

We don't have 24 missiles loaded on our Tridents. Some of the tubes have been disabled to comply with treaties.
And there's a limit to the number of warheads that can be loaded on each missile.

so I wonder if there's another possible conclusion?

Part of our stated policy is that we only shoot at hardened military targets with nukes. In the old days, when I first got in, they told us that part of the plan was if they were hardened against one of our nukes, we'd just drop two or three more on the same site and drill down to where the target was.

With our reductions in warheads and delivery systems, that is no longer a really good option. But apparently this fuzing makes it possible to hit a four-bomb-hardened target with only one bomb.
So MAYBE we're not prepping for a first strike, but we are dealing with the realities of the limited warhead numbers available for our war script, so we can keep the same prioritized targets and not have to double- triple- or quadruple-pound them, forcing a choice between targets.

 

[barbos]

This is a kind of thinking that could kill us all.

Sounds kind of alarmist, really.

What's your source, though? WHO came to these conclusions?
Why is it in the news?

It IS alarming, source in the OP.

 

[Keith&Co.]

Nothing? Not quite 'nothing,' I would say.

This is a kind of thinking that could kill us all.

I would say that claiming there's 'nothing' the US could do about Russian submarines would also be 'kill us all' kind of thinking.

- - - Updated - - -

It IS alarming, source in the OP.

Yes, but it's not 'the news,' though, is it?
I wonder why you brought it up that way?

And the 'alarmist' was referring to your opinion.

 

[barbos]

This is a kind of thinking that could kill us all.

I would say that claiming there's 'nothing' the US could do about Russian submarines would also be 'kill us all' kind of thinking.

- - - Updated - - -

It IS alarming, source in the OP.

Yes, but it's not 'the news,' though, is it?
I wonder why you brought it up that way?

I think you need to read the article.

And the 'alarmist' was referring to your opinion.

It's not merely my opinion.

 

[Keith&Co.]

It IS alarming, source in the OP.

Yes, but it's not 'the news,' though, is it?
I wonder why you brought it up that way?

I think you need to read the article.

I did read the article. I still wonder why you presented it as something you read in 'the news.'

And the 'alarmist' was referring to your opinion.

It's not merely my opinion.

Scroll back. YOU said that the US could do nothing about Russian sub-based missiles, I said that statement wasn't entirely correct, you said that pointing out the flaw in your absolutist claim was going to get us all killed. THAT is your opinion, and THAT is what I was calling alarmist.

Your reading skills seem to hamper your ability to communicate.

 

[barbos]

It IS alarming, source in the OP.

Yes, but it's not 'the news,' though, is it?
I wonder why you brought it up that way?

I think you need to read the article.

I did read the article. I still wonder why you presented it as something you read in 'the news.'

That's a lie

And the 'alarmist' was referring to your opinion.

It's not merely my opinion.

Scroll back. YOU said that the US could do nothing about Russian sub-based missiles, I said that statement wasn't entirely correct, you said that pointing out the flaw in your absolutist claim was going to get us all killed. THAT is your opinion, and THAT is what I was calling alarmist.

Your reading skills seem to hamper your ability to communicate.

Read the damn article and try to comprehend it.

 

[Keith&Co.]

I did read the article

That's a lie

Whether or not I did, that's still completely apart from the fact that it's not 'the news.'

Read the damn article and try to comprehend it.

Dude, you can't even seem to comprehend this thread...

 

[barbos]

That's a lie

Whether or not I did, that's still completely apart from the fact that it's not 'the news.'

How so? I read about it in the news, it is a news.

Read the damn article and try to comprehend it.

Dude, you can't even seem to comprehend this thread...

It's not me, it's you.

 

[barbos]

Anyway, it's paradoxical but reduction of nuclear arsenal did not make the world safer, quite the opposite, it increased the probability of nuclear war.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Well, if someone has 200 nuclear missiles and your first strike knocks out 180 of them, you just committed suicide for your entire country by launching that first strike. If someone has 5 and you knock out 4, you just sacrificed one of your largest cities by launching that first strike and whatever dumb-assed and pathetic goals you had for starting that war, they weren't worth the loss of that city. If you don't have 100% certainty of taking out all their nukes, you don't launch a first strike against a nuclear power.

The only value there is to a nuclear weapon is the deterrent effect it has against other people with nuclear weapons.

 

[barbos]

Well, if someone has 200 nuclear missiles and your first strike knocks out 180 of them, you just committed suicide for your entire country by launching that first strike. If someone has 5 and you knock out 4, you just sacrificed one of your largest cities by launching that first strike and whatever dumb-assed and pathetic goals you had for starting that war, they weren't worth the loss of that city. If you don't have 100% certainty of taking out all their nukes, you don't launch a first strike against a nuclear power.

But this a thought process of normal human being, not a russian/american general. US has always tried to achieve first strike capability. And Russia has always felt safe feeling that they will always have these 20 nukes left, but not anymore, I mean they (russian generals) don't feel they would have these 20 nukes.

The only value there is to a nuclear weapon is the deterrent effect it has against other people with nuclear weapons.

Russia does not have it anymore it seems.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

But this a thought process of normal human being, not a russian/american general. US has always tried to achieve first strike capability. And Russia has always felt safe feeling that they will always have these 20 nukes left, but not anymore, I mean they (russian generals) don't feel they would have these 20 nukes.

The only value there is to a nuclear weapon is the deterrent effect it has against other people with nuclear weapons.

Russia does not have it anymore it seems.

Yes, it really is too bad that Russia hasn't taken the time to put a nuclear weapon on a single submarine in order to help them avoid these first strikes or taken the time to develop a single suitcase bomb which can be deployed as a retaliatory strike, thereby making the entire rationale behind a first strike completely pointless. Their insistence on not putting their nuclear weapons anywhere except in these hardened bunkers was an example of poor decision making which is going to cost them the lives of every single person in their country.

 

[barbos]

But this a thought process of normal human being, not a russian/american general. US has always tried to achieve first strike capability. And Russia has always felt safe feeling that they will always have these 20 nukes left, but not anymore, I mean they (russian generals) don't feel they would have these 20 nukes.

Russia does not have it anymore it seems.

Yes, it really is too bad that Russia hasn't taken the time to put a nuclear weapon on a single submarine in order to help them avoid these first strikes or taken the time to develop a single suitcase bomb which can be deployed as a retaliatory strike, thereby making the entire rationale behind a first strike completely pointless. Their insistence on not putting their nuclear weapons anywhere except in these hardened bunkers was an example of poor decision making which is going to cost them the lives of every single person in their country.

Well, according to expert named Keith&Co, russians subs are not the problem. I mean when I mentioned subs he called me an idiot.
But according to article russian generals don't feel that ICBM subs are enough of a deterrent for american generals.

 

[Keith&Co.]

Well, according to expert named Keith&Co, russians subs are not the problem. I mean when I mentioned subs he called me an idiot.

Wow, what a load of horse shit.
I didn't say they were not a problem.
I did not call you an idiot.
You said, in absolute terms, that the US could do nothing about them.
I said that was not true. If our subs can find them, they can do 'something' about them.

If I was to call you an idiot, it would probably be because you're worse than syed is at actually understanding what you're reading, as evidenced by the lies you're telling here.

 

[barbos]

Well, according to expert named Keith&Co, russians subs are not the problem. I mean when I mentioned subs he called me an idiot.

Wow, what a load of horse shit.
I didn't say they were not a problem.
I did not call you an idiot.
You said, in absolute terms, that the US could do nothing about them.
I said that was not true. If our subs can find them, they can do 'something' about them.

If I was to call you an idiot, it would probably be because you're worse than syed is at actually understanding what you're reading, as evidenced by the lies you're telling here.

Will you ever take a hold of yourself and start actually discussing the topic and not the person you don't like?
no?
OK, you are worse than Trump! your turn.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Well, according to expert named Keith&Co, russians subs are not the problem. I mean when I mentioned subs he called me an idiot.
But according to article russian generals don't feel that ICBM subs are enough of a deterrent for american generals.

Then the problem isn't how the US deploys it's nukes, the problem is that the Russian military has a bunch of idiots who've been promoted to generals. No amount of planning can fix stupid.