31
- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
What are the defenses against Nukes? Is there an interception wespon, if not, why?
Posted on 9/20/26 at 9:17 am
Posted on 9/20/26 at 9:17 am
Why are every other type of rockets, missels, etc able to be destroyed en route to targets, but not nukes?
Obviously the angle if my question is that i font care if Iran has a nuke, as long as we can shoot it down before it strikes
Obviously the angle if my question is that i font care if Iran has a nuke, as long as we can shoot it down before it strikes
Posted on 9/20/26 at 9:21 am to ChatGPT of LA
I’m sure we have some type of anti missile defense but one miss and it’s catastrophic, plus what if they don’t fire a middle and just bring it on a container ship?
Posted on 9/20/26 at 9:23 am to ChatGPT of LA
quote:
i font care if Iran has a nuke, as long as we can shoot it down before it strikes
The imminent danger wouldn't be Iran nuking us.
It would be Iran nuking Israel (or the other way around).
And please before you reply with, "Well I don't care what they do to each other it wouldn't affect me," take five minutes and just Google the likely global effects of a nuclear exchange between Iran and Israel. It would affect the entire planet. You think $6 diesel is a problem?
And remember that today's nuclear weapons are around 30 times more powerful than the bombs we dropped on Japan.
This post was edited on 9/20/26 at 9:25 am
Posted on 9/20/26 at 9:27 am to ChatGPT of LA
you need shite like Star Wars satellites with lasers.
Posted on 9/20/26 at 9:29 am to ChatGPT of LA
quote:
Obviously the angle if my question is that i font care if Iran has a nuke, as long as we can shoot it down before it strikes
If Iran had a nuke (they would have between 10-13 warheads with the amount of material they admittedly have) and if an exchange came, it would not be with US homeland. It would be closer to Iran. At those distances and time it would take to travel those distances, interception becomes almost impossible.
Posted on 9/20/26 at 9:33 am to UtahCajun
And set off a global exchange.
Posted on 9/20/26 at 9:34 am to wackatimesthree
quote:
And remember that today's nuclear weapons are around 30 times more powerful than the bombs we dropped on Japan
Not all nukes are the same. Low yield, which are comparible to the Hiroshima bomb, are much easier and cheaper to make. Iran was aiming for low yield weaponry.
But as anyone can see in the link below, is more than bad enough.
Iran was pursuing low yeild weapons
Posted on 9/20/26 at 9:35 am to wackatimesthree
yes, our War Department and other nations have run simulations for decades where one nation pops off a nuke.
They overwhelmingly end up with global nuclear war.
They overwhelmingly end up with global nuclear war.
This post was edited on 9/20/26 at 9:41 am
Posted on 9/20/26 at 9:36 am to TrueTiger
Yep every single time.
Posted on 9/20/26 at 9:37 am to ninthward
Best thing about global nuclear war will be not having to watch prescription drug commercials at every commercial break during a live sporting events.
Posted on 9/20/26 at 9:37 am to TrueTiger
MAD-mutually assured destruction
Posted on 9/20/26 at 9:38 am to ChatGPT of LA
Don’t know.
I DO know that if Iran uses a nuclear device on another country, regardless the delivery method and regardless the target, then Iran would be (as was explained to me by someone very involved with Iron Dome development) “a smoking hole”. And, they know it.
I DO know that if Iran uses a nuclear device on another country, regardless the delivery method and regardless the target, then Iran would be (as was explained to me by someone very involved with Iron Dome development) “a smoking hole”. And, they know it.
Posted on 9/20/26 at 9:47 am to OccamsStubble
quote:
smoking hole”. And, they know it.
They don't care. Armageddon brings the Kingdom of Heaven.
Posted on 9/20/26 at 9:52 am to ChatGPT of LA
My body is ready for winter
Posted on 9/20/26 at 9:54 am to OccamsStubble
That's the disconnect here when it comes to this Iran.
For half a century we operated on the basis of mutually assured destruction. That no matter what you did a single submarine had the capability to turn your country into a smoking hole.
But now in 2026, that strategy somehow wont work with Iran, and we've got to expedite further destruction of the global economy.
We closing in on a humanitarian crisis where a bunch of people in the poorest countries will starve to death. And we a big oil spill in the nAG away from desalination plants being shut down and people cut off from water supply.
For half a century we operated on the basis of mutually assured destruction. That no matter what you did a single submarine had the capability to turn your country into a smoking hole.
But now in 2026, that strategy somehow wont work with Iran, and we've got to expedite further destruction of the global economy.
We closing in on a humanitarian crisis where a bunch of people in the poorest countries will starve to death. And we a big oil spill in the nAG away from desalination plants being shut down and people cut off from water supply.
Posted on 9/20/26 at 9:55 am to ChatGPT of LA
quote:
Obviously the angle if my question is that i font care if Iran has a nuke, as long as we can shoot it down before it strikes
Pretty short sighted TBH…
Posted on 9/20/26 at 9:56 am to ChatGPT of LA
We have interceptors and a new generation is on the way.
Posted on 9/20/26 at 9:58 am to Stat M Repairman
I love how they rebranded ozempic for OSA. People are dumb.
But for the OP, you have to get the missile in it's midcourse phase. Once it's high enough, reentry is like 10 or 20 mach (something like that) which makes it almost impossible to stop. Then you have decoy missiles with a MIRV, etc. We have a defense system but it's roughly 50% effective on a single reentry vehicle.
My guess is we have a way to intercept these in each country we are worried about before they get into orbit.
But for the OP, you have to get the missile in it's midcourse phase. Once it's high enough, reentry is like 10 or 20 mach (something like that) which makes it almost impossible to stop. Then you have decoy missiles with a MIRV, etc. We have a defense system but it's roughly 50% effective on a single reentry vehicle.
My guess is we have a way to intercept these in each country we are worried about before they get into orbit.
Posted on 9/20/26 at 10:04 am to ChatGPT of LA
I think we probably have SOMETHING in space to attempt to defend.
How capable it might be, idk....
This is simply my guess and opinion.
How capable it might be, idk....
This is simply my guess and opinion.
Posted on 9/20/26 at 10:06 am to OccamsStubble
quote:
And, they know it.
And, that's what they want.
Page 1 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News