- 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
re: Why Have Nukes
Posted on 10/2/24 at 9:48 am to Ricardo
Posted on 10/2/24 at 9:48 am to Ricardo
quote:
I think low-yield nukes will be on the table eventually. But only when the strategic value warrants it. City destroyers are for mutually assured destruction. No one wants that.
I have always thought the same thing - think Starship Troopers - and those miniature nukes they used against the bugs.
1
Posted on 10/2/24 at 9:54 am to Lizardman2
Like I said, we already know how to make these devices. This is old technology. (The stuff we're aware of.)
It's possible to maximize a kill zone, damage equipment, munitions, without significant collateral damage. Even conventional bombs cause significant damage to infrastructure. A low-yield nuke (neutron bomb) will eventually be used. It's just a matter of when. Most people probably wouldn't even know it. I mean we see very significant explosions on YT as a matter of fact nowadays. A carefully placed nuke could clear an area the size of a city block and render technology useless in preparation for a larger invasion.
It's possible to maximize a kill zone, damage equipment, munitions, without significant collateral damage. Even conventional bombs cause significant damage to infrastructure. A low-yield nuke (neutron bomb) will eventually be used. It's just a matter of when. Most people probably wouldn't even know it. I mean we see very significant explosions on YT as a matter of fact nowadays. A carefully placed nuke could clear an area the size of a city block and render technology useless in preparation for a larger invasion.
Posted on 10/2/24 at 10:06 am to RolltidePA
Are they really a deterrent if everyone knows nobody will use them?
Posted on 10/2/24 at 10:12 am to Ricardo
A 10kt is still going to kill 100,000 people in amid major city. I'm not sure people have the stomach for that. That's Hiroshima levels aka war ending bombs.
Our Mk-4 have 1kt and 3.5kt varieties. These are the only ones I think we can get away with, without having big ones come in retaliation.
Now, none of the big ones should make it to the Western Hemisphere, unless China puts it on a ballon and Biden is in office.
Did I ever tell you why the US should annex Cuba?
Our Mk-4 have 1kt and 3.5kt varieties. These are the only ones I think we can get away with, without having big ones come in retaliation.
Now, none of the big ones should make it to the Western Hemisphere, unless China puts it on a ballon and Biden is in office.
Did I ever tell you why the US should annex Cuba?
Posted on 10/2/24 at 10:15 am to TigerSprings
Keep in mind, these are the weapons we know about that have been in production for decades. There's stuff much more precise than the 10 KT yield I referenced.
The horror scenes from science fiction and Tsar Bomba level nukes are not what would be deployed on a battlefield.
The horror scenes from science fiction and Tsar Bomba level nukes are not what would be deployed on a battlefield.
Posted on 10/2/24 at 10:24 am to Pvt Hudson
Iran supposedly doesn't have launchable nukes ......
Israel is not disposed to starting a nuclear war, while they can handle the courtesy warnings ......Like going into a courtroom and the opposing attorneys have discussed what they will toss before the bench today.
Israel is not disposed to starting a nuclear war, while they can handle the courtesy warnings ......Like going into a courtroom and the opposing attorneys have discussed what they will toss before the bench today.
Posted on 10/2/24 at 10:32 am to Pvt Hudson
quote:
Why Have Nukes...
...If you won’t use them?
Questions like this will prevent your advancement from Pvt Hudson to Corporal Hudson.
Nuclear capability is used as a deterrent to unchecked escalation in warfare. If those weapons are ever unleashed by anyone... Well, then, the game is over and nobody wins. Only a true mad man would employ their use. The environmental and health impacts it would have on non-belligerent nations neighboring the state on the receiving end could, and probably would, lead to international hostilities that would make WWII look like a skirmish in Grenada by comparison.
Posted on 10/2/24 at 10:41 am to Ricardo
quote:
Tsar Bomba level nukes are not what would be deployed on a battlefield.
Totally agree, but we do have a lot of tactical 30kts which will level a mile+ radius. That's way too big. Even a 1kt will take out downtown or a government buildings cluster. Or historic New Orleans.
I think we can use Nukes, but they have to be small <3kt and have to be in the Warehouse District or country side industry. We can't nuke the downtown of a populated city. They have to be used to stop war machine production or infrastructure. Not for casualties.
Posted on 10/2/24 at 10:44 am to Swamp Angel
We could and should have hit Tora Bora the Afghan Poppy Fields the Terrorist Camps and any other targets of opportunity with nuclear weapons after 9-11.
We had been hit by an attempted decapitation strike that did enormous damage to a major city and in our Capital.. We were justified in any level of response.
We would have gotten Bin Laden right away. No one would have dared said anything. and the American People would have stood united behind it. The world would have gotten the message the gloves were off. Many good men and women would be alive and whole today because we never would have gone into that worthless place.
We had been hit by an attempted decapitation strike that did enormous damage to a major city and in our Capital.. We were justified in any level of response.
We would have gotten Bin Laden right away. No one would have dared said anything. and the American People would have stood united behind it. The world would have gotten the message the gloves were off. Many good men and women would be alive and whole today because we never would have gone into that worthless place.
Posted on 10/2/24 at 10:54 am to Swamp Angel
quote:
Nuclear capability is used as a deterrent to unchecked escalation in warfare.
I think you nailed it. Who are the comfortable ones in warfare?
Rough seeing images of Russian and Ukrainian kids getting blown up alone in a field while Zelenskyy attends gala luncheons around the globe. Let’s talk escalation when the leaders lead their armies into battle again.
Posted on 10/2/24 at 10:59 am to Pvt Hudson
Deterrence from other people using them. And it's worked extremely well for a very long time.
Posted on 10/2/24 at 11:05 am to Pvt Hudson
Concur. We're really just waiting for muzzies to take over England or some other nuke country and start blowing shite up.
Sooner or later, these things are getting used.
Sooner or later, these things are getting used.
Posted on 10/2/24 at 11:07 am to Pvt Hudson
Do you take personal responsibility for every action of the US government?
Didnt think so...so why should innocent Iranian people, that includes half a million Christians, be genocided because of their government?
Didnt think so...so why should innocent Iranian people, that includes half a million Christians, be genocided because of their government?
Posted on 10/2/24 at 11:09 am to Pvt Hudson
quote:
If you won’t use them?
Deterrence. Mutually Assured Destruction.
Posted on 10/2/24 at 11:10 am to Pvt Hudson
quote:
Rough seeing images of Russian and Ukrainian kids getting blown up alone in a field while Zelenskyy attends gala luncheons around the globe. Let’s talk escalation when the leaders lead their armies into battle again.
Very well put. That's the way to trade in that stripe on the sleeve for an eagle on the collar. I'm gonna have to start calling you Colonel Hudson now.
Posted on 10/2/24 at 11:11 am to Pvt Hudson
quote:
Are they really a deterrent if everyone knows nobody will use them?
That’s why they’re a deterrent. Countries, particularly those who are potential “bad actors,” don’t use them because they know that they’ll also be destroyed if they do.
Posted on 10/2/24 at 11:13 am to Pvt Hudson
Your argument reminds me of a joke from an old Simpsons episode, where Nelson Muntz has a “Nuke the Whales” sticker on his wall.
Lisa: “Why do you want to nuke the whales?”
Nelson: “Gotta nuke something.”
Posted on 10/2/24 at 11:14 am to Pvt Hudson
Guy up the road has a tank, don't think he'll ever use it but, I bought an A-10 just to keep him honest.
Posted on 10/2/24 at 11:20 am to Pvt Hudson
quote:
If you won’t use them?
:Japan has entered the chat:
Posted on 10/2/24 at 11:30 am to Pvt Hudson
quote:
What part of Iran indiscriminately lobbing hundreds of missiles into a city of civilians doesn’t mitigate a response by Israel to obliterate the threat?
Are you fricking crazy?
Legit question.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News