• "Spreading the ideas of freedom loving people on matters regarding metals, finance, politics, government and many other topics"

Trump responds to Putin’s warning that nuclear threat ‘not a bluff’

Goldhedge

Retired
Sr Midas Sup +++
Survivor
GIM Hall Of Fame
Joined
Mar 28, 2010
Messages
69,923
Reaction score
156,739
Location
Rocky Mountains
^ That was so you didn't get glass and plaster on your self.

And I'm guessing that would be the end of human civilization.
I suspect we would just start over as Cro-Magnon?

We probably have done it a few times already, but it takes several millennia to get to where we are today which is why nobody remembers.
 

Unca Walt

Midas Member
Midas Member
Midas Supporter
Joined
Mar 15, 2011
Messages
16,290
Reaction score
33,796
Location
South Floriduh
^ That was so you didn't get glass and plaster on your self.


I suspect we would just start over as Cro-Magnon?

We probably have done it a few times already, but it takes several millennia to get to where we are today which is why nobody remembers.
But this time the human race would not have a planet of untapped resources. Without, say, the Mesabi Range and its like.

But it would have to contend with the half-life of plutonium 239 from the thousands of unstoppable nuclear missiles from all sides to all sides -- each one having a deadly poisonous half-life of 24,110 years -- so the arable land, fresh water, livestock, wildlife will "only" be poisoned by half the total amount of deadly radiation the was spread across the earth.

After 50,000 years, maybe some of the insects that survived may get somewhere. Humans will not. <-- Intelligence is and anti-survival trait. We worked very hard with extremely intelligent teams and procedures to develop the very, very best means to kill ourselves:

Kill ourselves with both atomic atomic radiation, and runaway intentionally self-inflicted fatal Fauci viruses. No future for man -- ever -- after the first missile hits -- wherever it hits for whatever evanescent reason.
 

viking

Silver Member
Silver Miner
Site Supporter
Survivor
Joined
May 12, 2010
Messages
4,217
Reaction score
9,630
Russians have a base in Venezuela armed with hypersonic missiles that are well within the range of the Eastern United States. Do a little more research before posting please.

Minuteman missiles are obsolete. Don't kid yourself thinking they are effective. Fissionable nuclear materials in warheads have a very limited shelf life and must used or replaced. A friend worked at Sandia Labs in Albuquerque for the DOD and his specialty was nuclear bomb triggers. He would absolutely agree. He also said the DOD's biggest fear is nuclear generated EMPs which would neutralize any attempt at launching missiles in the first place.

“ Do a little more research before posting please.”

Well, how about the fact that I intensely studied Russian weapon systems and was qualified twice, once in the Pacific theater and later in the European theater, in the only weapon system in the world that deploys a nuclear warhead under “lone man” control. Still interact with those currently in the services.

What is your background?

PS. Your “buddy” doesn’t understand EMP.
 

Unca Walt

Midas Member
Midas Member
Midas Supporter
Joined
Mar 15, 2011
Messages
16,290
Reaction score
33,796
Location
South Floriduh
“ Do a little more research before posting please.”

Well, how about the fact that I intensely studied Russian weapon systems and was qualified twice, once in the Pacific theater and later in the European theater, in the only weapon system in the world that deploys a nuclear warhead under “lone man” control. Still interact with those currently in the services.

What is your background?

PS. Your “buddy” doesn’t understand EMP.
True. The launch sites are Tempested. They require a physical hit to be rendered unusable. EMP just destroys human civilization. It does NOT destroy our beautiful nuclear holocaust ability at all.
 

Joe King

Midas Member
Midas Member
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
12,231
Reaction score
16,527
Location
Instant Gratification Land
ICBM are hypersonic. Only for a short period in the initial boast phase are they not “hypersonic.”
But icbm's are not maneuverable once launched and they only reach hypersonic speeds for a short time during the descent stage of their flight. (if they flew at hypersonic speeds in the lower atmosphere, they would burn up)
Icbm's are launched on a ballistic trajectory and it can therefore be predicted where they are going and the path they will take to get there.
Ie: they can be targeted by ABM systems.

A true hypersonic missile does not use a ballistic trajectory, and it therefore can not be easily predicted where they will be at any given time.
....and can therefore not be targeted by ABM systems.

The former have a much higher chance of being tracked and intercepted.

That's not to say ICBM's are useless, just that true hypersonic missiles offer an advantage that ICBM's simply cannot match.


 

viking

Silver Member
Silver Miner
Site Supporter
Survivor
Joined
May 12, 2010
Messages
4,217
Reaction score
9,630
But icbm's are not maneuverable once launched and they only reach hypersonic speeds for a short time during the descent stage of their flight. (if they flew at hypersonic speeds in the lower atmosphere, they would burn up)
Icbm's are launched on a ballistic trajectory and it can therefore be predicted where they are going and the path they will take to get there.
Ie: they can be targeted by ABM systems.

A true hypersonic missile does not use a ballistic trajectory, and it therefore can not be easily predicted where they will be at any given time.
....and can therefore not be targeted by ABM systems.

The former have a much higher chance of being tracked and intercepted.

That's not to say ICBM's are useless, just that true hypersonic missiles offer an advantage that ICBM's simply cannot match.



Some truth, but leaves a bit out.

Any ICBM (really any orbiting object) can be consider hypersonic in speed. All hypersonic is just five times or greater the speed of sound.

Yes, a ballistic missile is predictable, but an ICBM can carry many warheads and decoys that separate. So the exact targets remain unknown, and currently only a handful could possibly be intercepted. It would bankrupt any military that even tried to deploy the number of ABM systems to have a chance to intercept the current inventory of missiles.

If they did start such a massive program, a cheap countermeasure is build more missiles. And to further complicate any defense, deploy them in more locations.

Hypersonic speeds require a massive amount of fuel, so the range is limited.
 

Goldbrix

Mother Lode Found
Eagle
Mother Lode
Joined
Apr 4, 2010
Messages
21,899
Reaction score
35,255
I believe PUTIN is not bluffing.
But the only nation to use Atomic weapons in a war is : USA,USA,USA.
But times do change.
OBTW: The US is the only atomic nation who refused to sign a "Non First Strike Use Agreement".
 

viking

Silver Member
Silver Miner
Site Supporter
Survivor
Joined
May 12, 2010
Messages
4,217
Reaction score
9,630
I believe PUTIN is not bluffing.
But the only nation to use Atomic weapons in a war is : USA,USA,USA.
But times do change.
OBTW: The US is the only atomic nation who refused to sign a "Non First Strike Use Agreement".

Did Israel sign it?

From Wiki:

”China and India are currently the only two nuclear powers to formally maintain a No First Use policy”
 

Joe King

Midas Member
Midas Member
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
12,231
Reaction score
16,527
Location
Instant Gratification Land
Any ICBM (really any orbiting object) can be consider hypersonic in speed.
To be in orbit would require those speeds.
....but to be considered as a "hypersonic missile", it needs to also be maneuverable during flight. ICBM's themselves are not.


Yes, a ballistic missile is predictable, but an ICBM can carry many warheads and decoys that separate.
True, but they separate only on the descent phase.
During mid-flight is when they would be targeted by ABM's.


OBTW: The US is the only atomic nation who refused to sign a "Non First Strike Use Agreement".
Russia too.

In fact, Russia has specifically stated that they reserve the Right to use nuclear weapons in response to large scale conventional attacks.

India and China are the only two nations publicly pledged to not use them first.
 

Unca Walt

Midas Member
Midas Member
Midas Supporter
Joined
Mar 15, 2011
Messages
16,290
Reaction score
33,796
Location
South Floriduh
But icbm's are not maneuverable once launched and they only reach hypersonic speeds for a short time during the descent stage of their flight. (if they flew at hypersonic speeds in the lower atmosphere, they would burn up)
Icbm's are launched on a ballistic trajectory and it can therefore be predicted where they are going and the path they will take to get there.
Ie: they can be targeted by ABM systems.

A true hypersonic missile does not use a ballistic trajectory, and it therefore can not be easily predicted where they will be at any given time.
....and can therefore not be targeted by ABM systems.

The former have a much higher chance of being tracked and intercepted.

That's not to say ICBM's are useless, just that true hypersonic missiles offer an advantage that ICBM's simply cannot match.


It SO upsets me that every word above is flat out correct.

We are using technology not a whole lot different at all from when I was wearing stripes, and I am ancient. Sixty year old methods, if not actual tech. We have the equivalent in delivery systems equivalent to B-17 formations, while the Rooshians have gone a quantum leap forward. Not just to WWII ballistic technology (which we still use) but to undetectable, hyperspeed, come-from-anywhere nukes. <-- thousands more than we have.

Oh. And UNLIKE the Cuban thing. This time it is the OTHER guys that have thirty times the firepower we have available in their ultrafast delivery systems.

Kinda makes you want to get the idiot and the whore and the drunk the hell out of out lives, donnit? And offer Putin -- would he mind if we dropped a nuke (from a lumbering, detectable from anywhere, still-active-duty B-52) on the Nazi part of Ukraine by way of apology?
 

Goldbrix

Mother Lode Found
Eagle
Mother Lode
Joined
Apr 4, 2010
Messages
21,899
Reaction score
35,255

Joe King

Midas Member
Midas Member
Sr Site Supporter
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
12,231
Reaction score
16,527
Location
Instant Gratification Land
That means they have been attacked and the use is a counter-attack.
Yep, but it would still count as a first-use of nukes.

The whole idea of no first use is a dumb. The mere idea suggests that a nation would accept defeat while possessing weapons that could prevent a defeat. Treaty or not, no nation would do that.
 

SilverCity

Gold Member
Gold Chaser
Joined
Mar 31, 2010
Messages
3,981
Reaction score
4,300
Location
SW
“ Do a little more research before posting please.”

Well, how about the fact that I intensely studied Russian weapon systems and was qualified twice, once in the Pacific theater and later in the European theater, in the only weapon system in the world that deploys a nuclear warhead under “lone man” control. Still interact with those currently in the services.

What is your background?

PS. Your “buddy” doesn’t understand EMP.

Eight years in the aerospace working on Cruise missile guidance systems.

A few high-altitude airbursts with a sufficient nuclear load would seriously disable most of this country. Add super-cavitating nuclear torpedoes fired from Russian/Chinese submarines along our Eastern and Western coastlines. Not defendable.
 
Last edited:

keepitlow

Silver Miner
Seeker
Joined
May 4, 2010
Messages
531
Reaction score
257
Location
US
What?

Ever heard of ballistic missile submarines? Ours can carry up to 160 nuclear warheads each and we have 14 of them.

Nukes will be on bombers with cruse missiles if tensions are high enough.

Subs may be the only survivors. Or do they have sub seeking missles? USA is not used of pain. I think equal hits would affect USA more than Russia.
 

Goldbrix

Mother Lode Found
Eagle
Mother Lode
Joined
Apr 4, 2010
Messages
21,899
Reaction score
35,255
Subs may be the only survivors. Or do they have sub seeking missles? USA is not used of pain. I think equal hits would affect USA more than Russia.
URBAN AND SUBURBAN areas I'd agree.