Ukraine - Take two

Okay, the big conspiracy!
The war in Ukraine is being orchestrated by global elites to get rid of Putin so that they can get control of Russian natural resources. Why else are the corrupt politicians and governments supporting Ukraine to the tune of billions of dollars? Destroy his means of wealth and support. When push comes to shove, I believe that Putin will use limited yield nuclear weapons including giving them to proxy governments to target western countries without launching any ICBM’s. He can throw the world in to chaos with just a few hits. Target cities in Israel, UK, Germany, France, India, Japan, S. Korea, Mexico, USA, Canada, etc.. Not even all of these and probably not the USA.

Space Force says we have plenty of resources for collection of intel. But it is analysis that make the final product.

https://www.defensenews.com/intel-ge...n-space-report

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BushMasterBoy

The Rus Strategic Rocket Force is very capable and well funded. I was stationed in Western Europe. I had almost unlimited access. I worked PEN -AIDS (penetration aids) AKA electronic countermeasures.

If you think the Rus can not destroy the 20th largest cities in the US, I would say you are dreaming. Sure we can destroy a 100 of the largest cities in Russia. Trust me when I say, they do have a great and effective ICBM (intercontinental ballistic missile) force.

Just because the "Special Military Operation" in Ukraine is a huge failure does not mean a nuclear warhead on a missile cannot hit Kiev.

---

As I stated earlier, you want to make sure your best weapons are ready to go. With a limited budget, are you going to buy several million cases of Hoppe's No. 9 to clean the bores of AKs after firing that horribly dirty ammo, or will you spend it on maintaining your arsenal of world ending weapons?

Put another way, if you have a Porsche and a Toyota in the garage and foresee the need to race in the immediate future, which one will receive the maintenance?

Someone else asked if there are enough Russians willing to ensure those weapons are deployed. I say, absolutely yes.

Their military is not likely to promote men that are not staunch nationalists.

The real question is how good is the anti ballistic missile (ABM) system surrounding Moscow. The picture shows ABM's in hard underground shelters. I think the plan to protect Washington is navy frigates with an ABM system.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A-135_...missile_system

Attachment 91623

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FoxtArt

I understand a lot of side gigs, but there is a lot better jobs you could do other than whoring out for a Russian troll farm.

And if you're not being paid for pushing the Kremlin propaganda, you really should be.

Lots of different opinions in the world, yours is one of a tiny minority in this country that would pass the KGB's intelligence apparatus with a stamp of approval.

PS: You might want to throw away the polaroid photos you took a few decades back, they'll be incriminating someday.

---

What did I write that is untrue? It is easy to say it is propaganda without providing proof that they are lies, (not all propaganda is untrue). To insinuate that I am a traitor to my Nation for refusing to promote or go along with a majority opinion that I know is wrong should be beneath you. P.S. What Polaroid photos are you talking about?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BushMasterBoy

The real question is how good is the anti ballistic missile (ABM) system surrounding Moscow. The picture shows ABM's in hard underground shelters. I think the plan to protect Washington is navy frigates with an ABM system.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A-135_...missile_system

Attachment 91623

---

Irrelevant. Mutually assured destruction was always just that. No one is going to make it out alive. That's why avoiding nuclear conflict needs to be priority number one. All else can fall in line. But if the US and Russia (or China) start killing each other, even at the tactical level, it will likely mean the end of civilization on earth as we know it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mick-Boy

Irrelevant. Mutually assured destruction was always just that. No one is going to make it out alive. That's why avoiding nuclear conflict needs to be priority number one. All else can fall in line. But if the US and Russia (or China) start killing each other, even at the tactical level, it will likely mean the end of civilization on earth as we know it.

---

You really think it will kill everybody on the planet ? I highly doubt it. Mutually assured destruction of the nations capitals, but there will be survivors. Ukraine is holding off the invaders due to superior technology and training. General consensus is that if the Rus uses nuclear weapons in Ukraine, the US and NATO will respond by attacking any invaders in Ukraine.

Everyone on the planet? No. Every major city in all of the nuclear powers? Absolutely.

Let's follow your train of thought. Russia is put in a position where going nuclear is the only option left (no moral or ethical judgment attached, that's just where we find ourselves). They go nuclear at the tactical level (within Ukraine). US/NATO respond in kind. What happens next?

Both parties launch an all-out strike. This doctrine was well established during the cold war. I say again, civilization as we know it ends in nuclear fire.

Joe Laitin reports that reporters at Bikini were questioning an army lieutenant about what weapons would be used in the next war.
"I dunno," he said, "but in the war after the next war, sure as Hell, they'll be using spears!"

"Mutually Assured Destruction" was a Kennedy thing. The JCS had a doctrine of fighting using nuclear weapons and winning the war. Anything else was considered defeatist. OPLAN 8010 has a winnable doctrine too. Nice article below has an interesting point of view of Kennedy, LeMay, Lemnitzer, etc.


https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine...litary/309496/