Days after Helsinki summit, Russia shows off Putin's 'super weap..
Putin boasted in March would render NATO defenses "completely useless."
Good thing that warhawk Clinton didn't win
Tbh, this is good. The missile shield was a direct violation of MAD, and the US military build-up in the last decennia is very worrying. I hope we return to the international stability of the late cold war. Hopefully with an added economical dependance between russia, Europe and US that benefits everyone.
You dont build a missile shield for defense, you build it so you can have unopposed aggression.
Just the same you dont build a shield breaker for agression, you build it so you can hold others accountable.
I doubt this system will be very effective against the US missile shield though, but its the doubt that it 'might' that counts.
I just hope it not end in war beforehand.
The idea their nuclear powered cruise missile "is invincible to all the existing and advanced air and missile defence systems" is completely laughable. The only advantage a nuclear powered cruise missile has is a a range and loiter time only limited by the mechanical components. It has zero bearing on being able to resist air and missile defence systems.
Most of the other items presented have similar failings. Your bullshit sensor should be going off if someone claims a military system is "100% foolproof" or is capable of completely defeating all and future countermeasures. The only thing really of interest here is the SS-18 replacement and the glider/MARV warhead, and maybe the air-launched IMRBM. Either way, it should be a wakeup call that significant modernisation of the US arsenal is needed to maintain parity.
No-one in Europe fucking wants a war dude. If you actually think the missile shield is a freaking prelude to an offensive attack, you have genuinely no idea what NATO is about, or the state of Europe as a whole, despite apparently posting from Belgium.
The conventional military effectiveness of Russia is not even comparable to the US. Yes, they have a missile shield but they rely entirely on their MAD retaliation or irradiated earth tactics. The US however has a massive military stranglehold over almost the entire world.
I think i might have misrepresented my own argument though, My whole argument was that its good that missile shields are taken into question. If not politically, then by weapons like this. This since they are not a good thing for global peace and stability, people will feel safe under their iron domes and think they are untouchable and can do as they please. However, i am not for warmongering or rooting for Russia. Just for the return of a stable situation where the big players keep each other in check. Current world politics are too US dominated and we can see the problems that has caused on a daily basis.
No they don't.
I'm not even going to address what you've said because it's so completely wrong.
No, you're dumb, stop.
You are a genuinely dangerous person to the entire world with this type of thinking
In the article it says the missile can cruise at mach 20 and still make controlled lateral and altitude movements, that's pretty god damn fast. Also, it's worth noting that darpa and the pentagon are working on similar missiles / aircraft
"Hi, I am entirely making up everything i'm saying, but take me seriously please" the post.
Hey, I have a question:
Why was that era called Cold >>>WAR<<<?
A. Because it was was very stable and very peaceful
B. Because we were literally on the verge of to-be the most devastating armed conflict ever
Chose your answer very fucking carefully.
It is the warm aftermath now with Trump and Putin holding hands all time, it's so beautiful!
It was only cold because SOMEBODY didn't want to hug Russia or the US, yes I am looking at you China. They chose to hug NK instead, kinda like sticking your hand in liquid oxygen. Hence the term "Cold war".
I know what I am talking about, don't question me
It doesn't matter how effectively it can penetrate missile defenses, the use of even one nuclear weapon means the end of Russia at least, the end of the rest of the world for a near certainty. Submarines already make most missile defenses moot, to say nothing of the sheer volume of nuclear weapons that would be used in a countervalue strike. And that's assuming most missile defense / defense penetration systems work perfectly, which they have an absolutely shit track record of doing.
Putin just found a bigger dick to wave, and it's only ever going to wave. I can't say I care much about being wrong on this one, because if I am then I'm going to have bigger problems than being incorrect on the internet.
our ABM system is incapable of defending against hundreds of MIRV'd ICBMs with active ans passive countermeasures. its only capable of defending against a few missiles at a time, which is all you expect from iran or north korea
Or maybe, we want a non-invasive method to defend against potential missile attack from a country with a history of invading its neighbors
Fuckin' Blizzerd. You think you're fooling anyone with that name? Even putting on the "pretending to be dumb" facade. Good lord.
Remember, this is the same guy that got perma'd after self-admitting to being a racist. Also, the late stages of the Cold War were the most tense. What you said made no sense.
So, these sound like hypersonic weapons. Wasn't the US military working on hypersonic weapons as well?
Remember when wickedplayer494 got banned for saying stupid shit
Can we have that happen again
I'm 99% sure blizzox is blizzerd.
You mean when everyone was afraid that the Soviets were going to glass the Earth over a slight misunderstanding, and ads were ran on TV warning children to get under their desks and hope they don't get turned into scrambled eggs when the EVIL COMMIES NUKE AMERICA, and start a nuclear war that kills every living thing?
This is objectively wrong, and I don't even know how to address this. The sole purpose of a system that breaks MAD would be to unbalance the systems of the nations and give you a fighting chance if you do something nuke worthy. The ONLY purpose would be for aggression. What do you mean by "holding others accountable"? Are you saying start a war if they do something you don't like?
You want to know how to stop a nuclear holocaust? Stop trying to do shit that will get you nuked. Sit down, shut the fuck up, and quit trying to start a war or whatever batfuck crazy things would warrant having a system to defeat missile shielding.
"Hey guys we're closer to the brink of the apocalypse and this is a good thing"
No, fuck off.
Mr. Putin, your puppet does not attend these forums. Why are you here?
that's just what it is though, dickwaving. it's pretty much the entire purpose. these things are never meant to be used, they're just supposed to be warnings like "hey guys we're still sitting a top the second/first largest nuclear stockpile in the world please do not forget that next time we're negotiating thank you". A nuclear weapon is far more a bargaining chip than an actual weapon, the time where it could've been used as one without massive repurcussions and cataclysmic events is long gone.
Submarines don't render missile defences moot and we've never had enough nuclear weapons to "end the world".
You might want to check how many nukes we got...
It'll leave the world uninhabitable for a number of decades from the radiation.
Who needs to care about defending against MIRVs when you can just atomize the atmosphere? Sure there's some fallout to deal with afterwards but you'll never worry about nukes coming down again! (or having anything with transistors in it).
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.