"They want to start WWIII"

[Loren Pechtel]

Except when watching the video, it seems to derive its damage from kinematic rather than explosive means.

It was a test, however, it must be said that at Mach 10 kinetic energy is 2x of a typical HE warhead of the same mass, so......

Flying at Mach 10 doesn't mean it arrived at Mach 10. It's going to bleed speed in the lower atmosphere. And good luck making a seeker that will function in that environment.

 

[bilby]

these missiles can not be fired (for technology reasons) by anyone except US personal.

What a load of crap.

This is beyond stupid. There is nothing Americans can do that a Ukrainian can't learn to do in three fucking years.

There is no technology that can only be operated by Americans.

How could anyone be dumb enough to actually think, much less say, something so obviously absurd?

We don't allow the satellite codes to operate these missles to anyone but ourselves.

That's not a "technology reason".

That's a "permissions reason". And one you cannot possibly know exists, unless you have a very high security clearance and a need to know. So it's no better than a guess.

If I said RVonse's wife cannot drive RVonse's car "for technology reasons", that would be daft. If it turns out that what I mean is "I don't think RVonse would give his wife access to his car keys", that would be a baseless guess, that required information I don't have, and wouldn't expect anyone to ever give to me - not least because it's none of my business.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The only reason that ballistic rockets weren't abandoned in the 1950s as the futile waste of effort that they so obviously are, is that we invented a warhead so powerful that such rockets were able to deliver enough destruction to pay for themselves.

HE and incendiary bombs are cheap and numerous. Nukes are rare and expensive. Only the latter justifies the cost of a rocket that is essentially impossible to intercept, and then only because it carries the punch of millions of conventional HE or incendiary bombs.

Ballistic missiles are only really useful for delivering nuclear weapons; And nuclear weapons are only really deliverable by ballistic missile (unless you have air supremacy over your targets, and/or can afford to lose a lot of your very expensive bombs to enemy defences).

Disagree. 1950s ballistic missiles weren't useful for anything short of nukes. However, they have gotten a lot more accurate, they now have use against high value deep strike targets. Nobody's going to use them for such because of the fact they normally carry nukes, but consider things like using cluster munitions against oil refineries. Modern missiles are good enough to do this and such a target is certainly worth the cost of a missile.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I see a lot of coping and rationalization.
But if you insist then you can ask Putin to load a nuke during the next test.

I see pootin increasingly grasping at straws because he's not succeeding in Ukraine and a failure will bring revolts.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I am really astounded how successful Putin's narrative has become. He has completely captured our right wing media.

What do you believe the world will look like if Putin wins and the US loses? Will your life be poorer or less free? Will you still be alive if Putin wins?

Virtually all news that we see in the media was created by one of three agencies – Associated Press, Reuters, and, to a lesser degree, AFP.
All three companies are owned by the same parent companies, who, in turn, own most of the Western corporatist structure, and, not surprisingly, the reports that they distribute to the media are boilerplate. Do you think it is possible that many in the US have already been captured by our main stream media in any way? Or is it just Putin and the right wing media that holds the official narrative?

And those guys also control the foreign press?? No way.

You have been captured by the right wing disinformation machine, believing anything they say even when it doesn't make sense.

 

[Elixir]

I see a lot of coping and rationalization.
But if you insist then you can ask Putin to load a nuke during the next test.

I see pootin increasingly grasping at straws because he's not succeeding in Ukraine and a failure will bring revolts.

That’s because you didn’t notice his Knight in shining Armor coming to rescue him.

 

[laughing dog]

Will you still be alive if Putin wins

Your last question is truly pointless.

What you view as pointless is in evolutionary standards the top and highest priority for all life that has ever existed on earth. To wit, will we survive to see tomorrow and if not what do we have to do? What bear or lion needs to be killed so that we will survive and be able to reproduce??

My personal survival has nothing to do with the survival potential of the human race. Moreover, this war is killing many more people. Your response is inane.

In the case of Russia, we saw a bear that was coexisting pretty well with us until Biden started kicking the shit out of him. So why are we required to risk our lives killing this bear when leaving him alone worked in the past? Must we risk all our lives for the profits of the MIC?

How in the world did Biden "kick the shit" of out Russia?

Honestly, I think we experience reality in completely different planes of existence.

 

[bilby]

...they now have use against high value deep strike targets. Nobody's going to use them for such...

You do realise that you just contradicted yourself, right?

Ballistic rockets are a shit way to deliver high explosives, for both technological and political reasons.

According to Wikipedia, the Minuteman III has a CEP of ~200m, and can deliver at most ~2,000 kg in 10 MIRVed parts, so maybe 200kg per hit.

200kg of TNT 200m away will give you a headache, but it's easily survivable for a hardened target. If you aim all 10 at one spot, you'll likely get a single direct hit. But 200kg of HE still isn't a big deal for a well constructed bomb shelter. And of course, you need to know where the target is, to a precision rather better than 200m, which you probably won't.

There are no cluster munitions I know of that can be delivered in this way; But regardless, they are only going to be effective against soft targets.

If the Germans had had a V2 with a CEP of 200m at central London, and costing only the same as the actual V2, they still would have been less effective than spending the money on aircraft and dumb bombs, given that by 1944 every high value target in London was deep underground.

If you want to take out an oil refinery, there are far cheaper ways to do it than using conventional explosives carried by IRBMs.

 

[RVonse]

Must we risk all our lives for the profits of the MIC?

We aren't risking our lives. The people at risk live in Ukraine. They are the ones suffering. Clearly they think it is worth it.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Must we risk all our lives for the profits of the MIC?

We aren't risking our lives. The people at risk live in Ukraine. They are the ones suffering. Clearly they think it is worth it.

Is your understanding of history, politics, and current events all founded on movies you've watched?

 

[ZiprHead]

Must we risk all our lives for the profits of the MIC?

We aren't risking our lives. The people at risk live in Ukraine. They are the ones suffering. Clearly they think it is worth it.

While Robert DiNiro is a great actor and all, I fail to see the significance of this bit of fantasy.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

News agency - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Although there are many news agencies around the world, three global news agencies, Agence France-Presse (AFP), the Associated Press (AP), and Reuters have offices in most countries of the world, cover all areas of media, and provide the majority of international news printed by the world's newspapers.

That does not address your claim that all 3 are owned by the same parent company. Nor does “majority of news” support your claim of “virtually all”.

It's obvious! They all give a version of reality that's not cult-approved. Thus either the cult version is wrong or everyone else is--and the only way everyone else is if it's actually a cabal. Therefore it is a cabal.

 

[Patooka]

In the case of Russia, we saw a bear that was coexisting pretty well with us until Biden started kicking the shit out of him.

Please, pretty please list all of Biden's foreign policies that were "kicking the shit" out of Putin. I'll wait.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Washington is the Hegemon, global hegemon.
Russia is tiny and nobody even Baltic States is scared of us.

I ignore most of the barbos disinformation, but this goes too far even by barbos' standards. First note that Russia has 5,580 nuclear warheads (plenty in the air, plenty on land and plenty underwater), the largest stockpile in the world. Before the Soviet fall, both superpowers were led, in effect, by rational committees but with the superpowers now led by fascist narcissists the threat of nuclear war has never been more dire. The one "saving grace" is that Trump has been happy to play Putin's stooge and is likely to acquiesce to Putin's demands rather than provoke a holocaust.

Agree except for the detail that I would be shocked if the majority of those warheads weren't inoperative.

 

[bilby]

Washington is the Hegemon, global hegemon.
Russia is tiny and nobody even Baltic States is scared of us.

I ignore most of the barbos disinformation, but this goes too far even by barbos' standards. First note that Russia has 5,580 nuclear warheads (plenty in the air, plenty on land and plenty underwater), the largest stockpile in the world. Before the Soviet fall, both superpowers were led, in effect, by rational committees but with the superpowers now led by fascist narcissists the threat of nuclear war has never been more dire. The one "saving grace" is that Trump has been happy to play Putin's stooge and is likely to acquiesce to Putin's demands rather than provoke a holocaust.

Agree except for the detail that I would be shocked if the majority of those warheads weren't inoperative.

Me too. I would guess that maybe 1% are in working order. Maybe.

Still, 600 nuclear bombs is enough to ruin your whole day.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Will you still be alive if Putin wins

Your last question is truly pointless.

What you view as pointless is in evolutionary standards the top and highest priority for all life that has ever existed on earth. To wit, will we survive to see tomorrow and if not what do we have to do? What bear or lion needs to be killed so that we will survive and be able to reproduce?

In the case of Russia, we saw a bear that was coexisting pretty well with us until Biden started kicking the shit out of him. So why are we required to risk our lives killing this bear when leaving him alone worked in the past? Must we risk all our lives for the profits of the MIC?

We didn't start kicking the shit out of the bear. The bear decided to eat Ukraine and got it's shit kicked for doing so.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

...they now have use against high value deep strike targets. Nobody's going to use them for such...

You do realise that you just contradicted yourself, right?

No. I'm saying that nobody is going to use a ICBM with a conventional payload because the standard is ICBMs carry nukes. That does not mean there is no reason to put a conventional payload on one.

Ballistic rockets are a shit way to deliver high explosives, for both technological and political reasons.

According to Wikipedia, the Minuteman III has a CEP of ~200m, and can deliver at most ~2,000 kg in 10 MIRVed parts, so maybe 200kg per hit.

200kg of TNT 200m away will give you a headache, but it's easily survivable for a hardened target. If you aim all 10 at one spot, you'll likely get a single direct hit. But 200kg of HE still isn't a big deal for a well constructed bomb shelter. And of course, you need to know where the target is, to a precision rather better than 200m, which you probably won't.

There are no cluster munitions I know of that can be delivered in this way; But regardless, they are only going to be effective against soft targets.

Soft targets are exactly what I was thinking of. And just because nobody has built one doesn't mean it's impossible to build one.

If the Germans had had a V2 with a CEP of 200m at central London, and costing only the same as the actual V2, they still would have been less effective than spending the money on aircraft and dumb bombs, given that by 1944 every high value target in London was deep underground.

If you want to take out an oil refinery, there are far cheaper ways to do it than using conventional explosives carried by IRBMs.

CEP of 200m is pretty much useless. Modern ICBMs are far better than that, though.

And the reason to use an ICBM would be the inability to get through with a more conventional weapon.

 

[barbos]

I ignore most of the barbos disinformation, but this goes too far even by barbos' standards. First note that Russia has 5,580 nuclear warheads (

They don't work and we are too chicken to use them. Nobody scared of hem.
On the other hand, if US state department put you on the list you are a toast, Can't travel anywhere, can't open a bank account. You sit in Russia/Iran/NK/China/....Hungary.
But if you do what they tell you, you are set for life. Cushy jobs after losing elections until next if you want, great pension if you are old. Everything is great when you work for State department.

 

[barbos]

Ukraine doesn't want Russia.

OK then it settled, Ukraine gives back Russia to Russia
Odessa, welcome back!

 

[barbos]

Russia has a small economy as Great Powers go; and its military strength is so doubtful it needed help from North Korea.

Yes, very good at parroting BS!