Miscellaneous News

siegecrossbow

siegecrossbow

General
Staff member
Super Moderator
emblem21 said:
I am impressed at how the media is doing its best to hide the truth but isn’t this going to eventually backfire, I mean if the media keeps doing this and a disaster even worse the this occurs and with how shockingly bad the USA infrastructure is right now, it’s like they are wanting this to happen again. I can see how a civil war will eventually occur with Biden focusing on China and Russia like an autistic little sh!t and that I believe is going to be good in the long term for both nations provided they have the patience to wait it out which I think isn’t going to be hard to do given the whining and bitching they had in regards to a balloon
Click to expand...

Friggin chemical fire looks like this and somehow I just learned about it yesterday. WTF!

Seriously, why was no one talking about this???

1676291279395.png
1676291347776.png
 
Last edited:
plawolf

plawolf

Lieutenant General
BoraTas said:
I think the same too. My thoughts on how many nukes a country should have drastically decreased after the Ukrainian War too. Looking at the history of the "atomic age" and using common sense, I think these verdicts hold and aren't really controversial.

- Nukes and other WMDs are really effective in deterring direct conventional attacks. No country ever with any nuclear weapons was attacked with the intent to conquer them. This holds even if there is a massive conventional overmatch.

- Nukes are incredibly ineffective in deterring proxy wars. NATO is currently ignoring all of Russia's redlines regarding arms deliveries to Ukraine.

- Tactical nukes are 99% useless. Their use in "small wars" is politically completely unpalatable. Their use against great powers almost guarantees a nuclear apocalypse. I think a country should own 100-200 of them to have a last chance of stopping escalation or enemy conquest before the apocalypse. Other than that, nope. I think their only use is being the last way out before sides start destroying each other's cities, possibly. Their effectiveness against dispersed ground units isn't great either.

- Limited nuclear warfare is a dumb idea. There are no ways the escalation stops after civilians start dying in ten thousands.

- Counterforce and decapacitation strikes are wishful thinking at best. In the early cold war when mobile launchers were almost non-existent and early warning was very unreliable? Maybe. Now? Complete wishful thinking. It is just too easy to have enough mobile launchers. VLO bombers and subs with hypersonic missiles might blow up some silos and non-deployed mobile launchers, but that's about it. And I wouldn't bet on that either considering the stakes.

- You don't really need to destroy a country. Just taking out the metropolitan population would break a country for generations. To add further pain you can take out infrastructure nodes. That would make other smaller cities dysfunctional for years to come. Also would cause many indirect deaths. These don't require many nukes. A few hundred French nukes were enough to deter the Soviets in the cold war. Even if you have 40,000 nukes, you still wouldn't want to eat a few hundred nukes.

So I don't think there are any benefits to having a cold war like arsenal. 300 is too few for many reasons (not enough destruction and ABM tech, primarily). But 5000+ nukes with counterforce measures? That's a waste of money. As I said on another thread, China's nuclear modernization would likely cause an overreaction on the US side, and that's a great thing for China. Spending dozens of billions annually on weapons you will never get to use without getting destroyed is a waste.
Click to expand...

If you are really sadistic, you don’t really need to glass major cities to collapse nations. If you study a map and look at how many nukes it would take to irradiate the vast majority of the drinking water of the world’s biggest countries, the number might be a lot lower than you think.

I also find all the peepee measuring contest with warhead numbers juvenile and largely irrelevant. It’s not how many warheads you have that matter, but rather how many and how reliably you can delivery them on target. The latter is where China’s nuclear modernisation focus lies, and for good reason. It doesn’t matter if you have a thousand warheads in storage if you cannot hit the enemy with any of them.

That’s not to say 300 warheads is enough for a country like China. But I think that 300 number was always just something someone pulled out of their ass in terms of a ballpark estimate and has never been seriously updated since it served the interests of both sides.
 
Z

zbb

Junior Member
Registered Member
coolgod said:
View attachment 107171View attachment 107172
Apparently, this was the UFO that was spotted in China earlier.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
Click to expand...

Those look very much like the spy balloons used by the US military.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
90
 
plawolf

plawolf

Lieutenant General
zbb said:
Those look very much like the spy balloons used by the US military.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
90
Click to expand...
Either an obvious photoshop, or it’s a Chinese balloon being developed for similar purposes.

I am leaning towards the former, as the spy balloon would have to be totally defective to fly so low that people on the ground could get a picture that clear of it with regular photo cameras, as I challenge anyone to get such a detailed shot of any passing civilian airliner at cruising altitude, which will be significantly lower than the altitude these balloons are supposed to operate at.
 
C

Chevalier

Captain
Registered Member
9dashline said:
This time the homeland wont go untouched... but the US elites are ready to sacrifice the bottom 90% of Americans anyway
Click to expand...
Theres a reason why billionaire elites have compounds and properties in New Zealand, and perhaps why even, NZ could have been made to adopt a neutral stance towards China to prevent Chinese nuclear attacks...
siegecrossbow said:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...
Like I was saying, have a journalist offer a glass of Ohio dioxin water to the USG spokesman and get them to drink it, if it’s so healthy for the American ppl.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top