Why is the gulf war so underappreciated in media?
Why is the gulf war so underappreciated in media?
Andrew Baker
Other urls found in this thread:
en.wikipedia.org
journals.sagepub.com
books.google.de
telegraph.co.uk
independent.co.uk
navy.mil
twitter.com
Easton King
It was over so quickly
Jeremiah Gomez
More importantly, how did the Jew benefit from the Gulf War?
Andrew Wilson
Ended up getting homogenized into the "global war on terror" in the public mindset and forgotten.
Angel Anderson
It was short, efficient, and brilliantly led. Hollywood mostly likes to make stories that tug at the heartstrings, or get your boner going, but there has to be a struggle. For example, the movie Jarhead, the biggest struggle isn't the war, and I guess that's kind of the point it makes about the war. There's a lot of good material on that war, just nothing that will get you excited or in deep thought.
Jace Lopez
It shouldn't, at all. It was the last time the US fought a uniformed opponent, a "real army". Also a last hurrah for the cold war aesthetic.
Lucas Murphy
Shouldn't be lumped in, but most people are retarded so there's that. Shit I know people who can't differentiate the Korean War and the Vietnam War.
Ryder Russell
no one can be this retarded
Logan Williams
They were both in Asia
That means they were the same thing
Landon Powell
Basically this, most millennials aren't even aware that Iraq had an actual army at one point.
Hunter Edwards
But Saddam Hussein was le evil dictator? How can one be a dictator of anything without an army?
Christopher Bell
One side won too hard. The only reason the Gulf War is brought up today is >muh DU fags crying about Iraqi birth defects. Which are actually just caused by Iraqi inbreeding.
Colton Price
en.wikipedia.org
That shit was real, bro. It just wasn't DU.
Aaron Price
Weakened Iraq, but at the same time it was really Saddam's fault for trying to invade a country that had close ties to the UK and NATO.
It really was a stomp, 50 years of military build up and planning unleashed in an actual conflict, Russian's must've shit themselves seeing Bradley's cut through entire brigades of the T-72M's they sold to the Iraqi's.
Ayden Ramirez
INB4 our resident frog or leaf jumps in to say NATO barely won and that was because Iraq let them and killed no sandniggers
Oliver Mitchell
Liberals downplay wars NATO won.
Ayden Flores
Forget the second gulf war, what about the first gulf war?
Iran-Iraq was such a massive shitfest, all kinds of equipment on both sides, chemical weapons, trench warfare, tank warfare, guerilla warfare, psychiological warfare, everything to get a strelok going!
Gavin Watson
Not enough chocolate chip.
Henry Cruz
My favorite part of the Iraq-Iran war was when the Iranians rolled little boys around in carpets to clear minefields.
Charles Reyes
Source? That's brutal.
Dominic Powell
It wasn't at the time, I still remember watching live feeds of offensives. The US knew it was going to be a steam roll so milked it for all the propaganda they could.
Sounds like bullshit, what does the kid add that any other ballast couldn't?
Carson Lee
Ironic ain't it?
Ethan Reyes
The Gulf was pretty aesthetic tbh. I used to have a picture of a British soldier with a rain poncho on carrying an L4 Bren, but I can't find it anymore. If someone has it, post it please.
I'm sure some British soldier living in England suffering from GWS is somehow causing the Iraqis to be born with birth defects.
Like the other user said, it's muzzie inbreeding that's causing the issues.
Hudson Smith
Hold a rifle.
Jose Evans
Still pretending that 1500 vehicles from which only 2% were armored (most were CIVILIANS CARS) where somehow where the 11 340 APCs, 4 050 IFVs, 38 853 trucks and 5 940 tanks of the Iraqi army and the 3000+ Tanks and IFVs of the Republican guard?
I'll repost it every-time I don't mind it's not like you ever made a counter argument.
All in all the US demonstrated that even retarded half-monkeys like the Iraqis can outmaneuver US military planners.
The only thing you're demonstrating is that you're a mouth breathing retard that can't even read a fucking map.
The guys that died on the highway were the greatly overestimated Iraqi army remnants trying to get out AFTER the Republican had retreated, those forces were seen as disposable conscripts in the first place and were there to be a literal meat curtain (Iraq had just been out of the Iran-Iraq war which was basically a WWI trench warfare slaughter, they couldn't care less about conscripts) and since the Iraqi republican guard retreated with most of it's gear (as per the US Airforce own admittance) and the final vehicles destroyed/captured count by coalition sources are nowhere near what you would need to deploy a force the size of the coalition estimate of the Iraqi regular forces (which were by all account pretty much either killed in airstrikes or captured without a fight… but somehow over half of them magically vanished in the desert with their tanks, APCs, IFVs and trucks… but they were totally there in the first place, we pinky swear).
You can fap all you want on the battle reports of the clashes west of the roads between Iraqi and US forces but the reality is the Iraqi high command SUCCEEDED in it's maneuver as it effectively bough enough time for most of the Iraqi republican guard to withdraw to Basrah area in good order and thus prevented the Iraqi main force to be trapped in a pocket by the US encirclement movement.
Because by the time of the cease fire the unit the deepest in Iraq (24th infantry) that should have been the flanking element between Basrah garrison and the main fight led by US heaviest divisions (1st cavalry, 1st and 3rd armor) was barely 40 miles of Basrah with the Iraqi main force already IN Basrah.
It's a classic tactical defeat/strategic victory for the Iraqis, which politically lead to a de facto 12 years ceasefire with near constant skirmishes due to the inability of the US ground forces to trap and destroy the Iraqi main force in a timely fashion, that would have secured either a general surrender or a collapse of Saddam's regime and an actual peace with Iraq.
All in all the US demonstrated that it's easy to bomb people that can't defend themselves (something everyone already knew but which became the US main political focus, 0 risks good to rake boomers votes in) and that when it come to ground fighting US forces are perfectly adequate tactically but that even retarded half-monkeys like the Iraqis can outmaneuver US military planners.
And while it's easy to fix tactics, it's nigh impossible to fix the other one, take it from people that have suffered from high command retardation since pretty much Napoleon and still aren't out of it even after the WWII and Indochinese purges.
Sauce:
LIBERATION, OCCUPATION, AND RESCUE: WAR TERMINATION AND DESERT STORM
John T. Fishel, Strategic Studies Institute U.S. Army War College, 1993
Pic related is from "Gulf War Air Power Survey Summary Report" of 1992.
Also, in case that's not clear enough, that's in George Bush own fucking memoirs, not that you know how to read or anything…
Cooper White
Sometimes I legit wonder if the whole "American army is the best in the world" meme is so far off of reality that the rest of the world in their attempts to compete with the "Best of the best" they dream of, have managed to create armies hundreds of times more effective than the burgers.
I mean, think about it. Every country wants to have soldiers who could compete with the "best of the best" American forces. However those "best of the best" are actually mediocre and incompetent retards who are believed to be strong entirely due to Hollywood and media propaganda. So the rest of the world is bettering themselves trying to beat an imaginary superpower that in reality doesn't exist. As a result the burgers are the ones who are behind everyone else in terms of training, tactics and overall combat effectiveness.
But that's just a theory a Zig Forums theory
Jack Young
who cares
Levi Taylor
It's a true decadent imperial army, like the Roman legions in the later days of the empire. The average legion was a collection of lazy faggots led by a politician who wanted power, and the actual fighting was done by barbarians. Today the US Army is a roundabout way of giving out more welfare, and is being taken over by Marxists who want to show the world how diverse they are. The actual fighting is done by special needs forces and mercenaries. And even if history is the same process repeating itself with slight differences, even I can't deny that technology progresses much faster than ever. I'm not even kidding when I say that a Central or Eastern European country could completely destroy an invading US force if they tailored their gear and tactics to put out more firepower for less money and had enough AA artillery to slow down their air campaign. Actually, they wouldn't even invade if you can just keep shooting down their planes.
But of course, their true power lies in the control of international finance and economy, so you'd be completely lost if you can't build at least a semi-autarky.
Luis Hernandez
You shouldn't under estimate US forces like that, even if they were totally incompetent the bite of a retarded dog is still unpleasant. There are two key factors which drive nations to want, specifically a deterrent force capable of preventing american interference in my opinion. Firstly, even during americas lowest points of economic might and strategic ability the US has always been large enough to economically ruin its opposition even in a war which the US loses. Secondly, while there is not actually one american culture, the culture which holds most sway politically in the USA is quite a bitter and revengeful one, countries that have or will only fought one war against the US are fairly rare.
to sum up, being an incredibly prickly porcupine is an important defense Characteristic for non american countries not because of the power of america, but because the USA has always been a very stubborn mule. Americas world power status is coincidental to its strategic threat, not causative and americans themselves would save alot of cash if they themselves realized it.
Cameron Thomas
I'm pretty sure if Russia or China tried to do the things US armed forces are put up to, they would have massive logistical and organisational problems as well. Just look at soviet in afghanistan compared to US there, same problems in both conflicts. Spec-ops and spetsnaz do really well, regular soldiers not so much. And if US army was asked to just clear out local rebel forces in their own region they would do it really well. If anything the US are at fault for trying to do stuff that can't really be done by armies, but the units themselves are probably pretty great at doing regular military operations.
William Green
There are no primary sources of this ever happening. Many "western" newspapers reported on it though, but none of them actually provided proof for their claims.
There is however A LOT of documented proof from many different sources about the use of child-soldiers by the Iranian side. There are even pictures of them. It is widely accepted that Iran recruited boys as young as 12 into the war. Some say that they used children as young as 9 in some cases, but I could not find a credible source that supports the age of 9.
>journals.sagepub.com
books.google.de
Ian Garcia
I might be just overly autistic, but I don't see the logic here, even if that's just extra ammo for a machine gun he doesn't operate. Could that be a posed image, or is it just a kid trying to dress tacticoolly?
Dominic Hill
If you look closely around his neck it appears as if he simply draped the ammo belt around him. Maybe he tucked the ends behind his back somewhere so they wouldn't clink and clatter around.
I doubt that the Iranians would stage a photo of a boy this young and this badly equipped.
I suspect that it's either:
a) an image made by someone in Iran for some purpose other than propaganda
b) a fake image produced outside of Iran to discredit the Iranians for using child soldiers
You could say b) about every conflict where child soldiers have been used though.
Joseph Fisher
Not everyone cares about every war you fat faggots have. It's hard to keep track of all the little brown people you spend millions to kill when they just breed twice as quick and refill the hive.
Do anti air weaponry even work any more? How do you shoot down a spec on the horizon as it laser guides a missle up your piss hole?
The US has shown it will destroy countries on a whim and lie about why it does it. It's the same reason everyone wants nukes. It's the only weapon that can scare the US into not engaging you. If the US tries to invade you and your immediate response is to drop a nuke on their base camp you just terrified everyone on the planet and made sure no one else tries to fuck with you. Their desire for revenge simply won't matter when the news headlines are "Durka Durka nukes US military base camp, thousands dead".
You can argue (((why))) the US starts the wars that it does but it's obvious to any one that it's a war monger nation that constantly attacks other nations who cannot defend themselves. That's the real US power, it's violent and the biggest dog.
Ryder Rodriguez
If anything they now work better than even before. Back then you really needed a plane to spit lead or fire missiles at other planes, now that's not the case anymore.
It's like you never heard of the Battle of Britain. The difference is that, instead of using the radar to guide your own planes to the enemy plane, you guide there a missile that is much faster than the plane. Then that missile will lock on the plane, flies right up ro its arse and explodes. Also note that maintaining a missile battery is cheaper on the long run than maintaning a plane. You need to constantly disassemble and reassemble the plane if you want to keep it flying, and you need to let your pilots fly it all the time to keep them in shape. Meanwhile an AA missile can be stored for a decade or two, and the crew can be trained on simulators. And you can launch the missile against drones at the end of its lifespan in a bigger army exercise.
Asher Ward
The burger army is led by incompetents and supplied by a corrupt, greedy, and politically incestuous military industrial complex, that's true. The thing you have to realize though is that most other militaries are also incompetent and supplied by greedy merchants, some even more so, and they don't have the weight of numbers (in soldier count and dollars) that the US does.
Caleb Johnson
Do you not realize you killed a whole fuckton of soulless communist gooks in Korea as well?
That kid has one hell of a milsurp collection. NVA mag pouch and bayonet, US Jeep cap, 1936 and 1956 pistol belt with pair of 1936 suspenders. The jacket looks like that battlejacket the bongs issued out during korea and ww2 and the pants I don't really have a clue on.
Machine gunners tend to operate in a team, its not uncommon for a guy in a squad to hold extra belts for said machine gun, I know guys attached to a BAR gunner would always carry an extra mag or three for said BAR man.
Nathaniel Sanders
What about the Chinese?
Angel Walker
Nigger the chinese are the biggest souless merchants of all
Daniel Morgan
Yea but you also killed a fuck load of people to help the commies. It kind of evens out.
Nicholas Phillips
Yes, murkans might be largely incompetent and stupid nowadays due to diversity quotas but they have enough gun to duke it out with the rest of the world combined. I doubt there's a freaking military in the world that would be able to win a conventional war against the US Navy alone. You don't need competence when you can dumb 1.5 trillion dollars per year into your military.
Zachary Martinez
Are you the guy that said that Radar guided missiles don't exist?
Nolan Moore
The way you talk you would think we lost the war you Russiaboo nigger
Brandon Morales
Don't be retarded Greekbro, in a hypothetical scenario where a war broke out between USA and Russia with no allies involved in either sides then I would bet all my money on the Russians winning either through superior combat or a war of attrition. Shit, I would even bet money on the fucking Chinks. The burgers aren't invisible and I doubt any american user here believes they could beat the entire world. Well, some might argue they could defeat the Chinks tbh.
Jacob Hall
I believe it's because it was as well as the fact that a lot of people outside of the US claim that they used the "voice of god" technology which literally made all the enemy shit themselves in fear. It was the testing ground for new tech from what has been described but all you read up on it is "hurr durr, I only believe in snopes…" etc. still think the gulf war was just a fucking gold rush to establish better relations with the saudis, if not get a foot in the door - see petrodollar/gold etc.
Pretty much the same thing, petro.
Wait some more "years", kind of like they say uranium is safe. kek.
am drunk so take it with a pinch of salt, the USA has been the "world police" since NAM and it's transparent to all outside the US except their own citizens and zogbots. Gulf just didn't have anything worth fighting for except $$$ and that's the plain old truth.
She'd be prettier without pouting, the piercing and the tattoos. What a wannabe, I feel sorry for her husband in the forces.
Jace Price
Camo only goes so far
Jason Gomez
Not so sure about brushstroke for West Texas, honestly it is too dark for out there.
Connor James
Russia would only have a hope to win in a defensive war "of attrition", since they have shitty projection of force and not even a true blue water navy, and that would be the case assuming that the Americans have been niggerified, feminized and overconfident enough enough to actually march past Kamchatka and into Siberia and the Arctic Ocean. I don't think you realize how much outgunned Russia is compared to Burgerstan. If it wasn't for its nukes Russia would be already "liberated and democratized" for not being a good enough goy.
Josiah Rodriguez
If Russia and the U.S. (and only us two, no help from others) got into a war it would end in a stalemate. Both countries are virtually un-assaultable. The U.S is pretty much an enormous island with two mountain ranges along each coast, and Russia is simply too large.
Lincoln Martin
Inaccurate pic, Russians don't have any aircraft carriers, only aircraft-carrying missile cruisers :^)
Before we make any kind of analysis you have to establish what the objectives/victory conditions of each side are–total annihilation of the other's military forces? Capture of the capital? And when we say no help from others, how far does that go? Are enemy forces still allowed to cross the borders of "neutral" countries for instance?
Justin Barnes
>Russians don't have any aircraft carriers, only aircraft-carrying missile cruisers :^)
I am not sure what you're trying to insinuate. :^)
In any near future realistic scenario the US has an enormous advantage on this subject. China and Iran are only allies of convenience, and especially chinks would backstab them for minor Manchurian clay-grabbing, all its western front comprises of countries that absolutely hate them plus the completely irrelevant Moldova and Belarus and Burgers would even have a Caucasian access thanks to Georgia and pic related moderates of peace in Dagestan and Czech Republic. America on the other hand not only already has military bases diplomatically counting as US soil all around the battlefronts but also has its hand in everybody's pockets with decades of gibs and its (((connections))) to the bank. Whatever the strategic goal was Russia would need a very high kill count to cause a 'nam reaction in the West and ultimately repel aggression.
Hunter Thompson
Brody Hernandez
Situation has changed aince capture of Crimea. Hardened silos have enough anti ship missiles now that the entire black sea is denied as a combat zone. Kurils serve the same role in the east, and Kalingrad in the north. Add to that sea mines, coastal artillery and air defense.
In all these areas they're ahead of the west by ~40 years, approximately the time when the west stopped caring about war.
I dont see any way America could invade Russia except mounting another polar bear expedition that would get laughably chewed up first by real bears, and then the pink variety.
China is Russias "friend" because Russia has 700 short ranged nukes aimed at all of their major metropolitan zones, over half a billion people could die in the space of an hour if China so much as sneezed wrong. No amount of clay or dorrar will make them get in a fistfight with someone who has a gun pointed at the back of their head. If you remember a few years ago Japan was "encouraged" by CIA to act belligerent about Kurils. Until the Russian GRU regional chief walked into jap intelligence uematsu office and gave them proof that A) foreign intelligence had compromised his cabinet secretary (later PM) fukuda and B) they would get BTFO hard if they did anything. Thats why Japan is gradually walking back the kuril claims, why uematsu resigned in disgust later on and how fukuda was forced to resign, how Japan started arming for real war, and telling US carriers to fuck off.
Charles Reed
It would probably make sense for Russia to play mostly defensive at first, try to get the US to send out a carrier group or some other form of force-projection. Then Vladdy boy can spam anti-ship missiles at it and we'll see how accurate those memes about carriers being easy-to-destroy moneysinks in symmetrical warfare really are.
Landon Morris
That would probably be their best bet given that the Arctic sea is a deathtrap of submarines and coastal airbases, the meme hypersonic missiles you mentioned and that the US Navy has recently shown signs of being particularly enriched even by Western standards. who_would_win_American_boats.jpg
But I think there are still a few Asian guys in the US high command to provide enough common sense and IQ for anyone not to try that approach assuming they are not chink spies.
Henry Roberts
Russia is on track to have nukes that can hit the US before minuteman III can be spin up, if that shit precise it mean they can destroy silos before launch.
The idea that the Russia would keep the war polite and nuke free is insanity. Russia wages their war to win them and know that the initial move is the most crucial.
They would hit the harder they can the faster they can.
What really worries me is that most of the US usable nukes are on subs and they aren't doing anything about it.
Hunting boomers isn't even on the priority list for the russian navy (they're hardly making SSN, they'd rather make SSK) and they haven't even made a modern antisub frigate IIRC, while it should be the Russian military N°1 priority.
The way they're going at it is as if it's not a threat. It makes me think they might have found a way to fuck with how NORAD relay orders to boomers.
Lucas Bennett
Don't fall for the "asians are the smartest!" meme. Chink IQ tests are known to be fake.
Ayden Rogers
US boomers relay orders by satellite coms and by the shitty microphone network they dumped everywhere. Russia can easily jam the satellite coms, and the microphone network can be overloaded and burned out because it doesn't have any breakers. But that's not the reason why they're confident, because US boomers can easily operate without orders, they have that authority.
The reason why they're confident is that the US boomer fleet is 300 trident missiles, more than 60% are Trident 1 while the remainder is Trident 2. Most of them aren't in position to do shit at any given time, and the air defenses they're coming up against are overwhelming. The A-135 missile system has 5500 defensive missiles and can defend the Moscow-St Petersbug area, while the S-300PMU/S-400 missile battalions added up have about 1500 anti ballistic missiles (and many more smaller ones) and is spread out to defend key sites and Vladivostok. If the boomers focused in a single fleet and launched all their weapons on St. Petersburg, they might break through. If they spread out their missiles, they won't do shit.
There's no point building an attack fleet to hunt boomers because they can be half the planet away when they launch their attack. That's simply too much space to search through. It's more efficient to focus on terminal defense since Russians only can't afford to lose three or four cities, it doesn't matter much if Tridents set some Siberian brush on fire.
So are kike tests, they literally only give the test to kike university students. Chinks do the same, except they also only focus on areas like Hong Kong.
Christopher Wright
pretty much this, in addition to what said about true american power being its (((financial economy))). the last factor that everyone misses is the ayy-tier technology that the US has been developing under black book, special access programs for the last 60+ years, and which it alone possesses. anti-grav and cloaking technology is just scratching the surface. now contemplate the fact that kikes own and control all of it by proxy, if not directly, if you assume that key actors within the government are defacto marxist zionists or crypto-kikes anyway.
Michael Russell
I wouldn't be surprised if they gave half their soldiers empty magazines and a spear shaped like a gun for all the terrible shit I hear about how they equip their soldiers.
Parker Harris
Pick one.
They definitely have problems with standardization in their military (just look up how a many different AR are in service in the chinese military) because of how stupid big it is and how procurement it works (It's service AND region based, like most shit is in China. You need to think of their army as NATO rather than a singular army).
The problem with their non standardization may actually not be one btw.
The Chinese military is so retard big (they been reducing it for two decades now and it's still idiotic) that there is a real question on whether there is a point in standardizing it. Given that each region (except maybe Western Theater Command) has enough of a military owned industrial basis to provide a full fledged logistic chain they have no real incentive to move past general parts and ammo compatibility similar to STANAG.
Chinese military staff and plans clearly never bother to involve OTHERS commands in their zone as was witnessed in Korea, Vietnam and India, which never saw the Chinese bothered to send troops from the other commands to the combat zones.
Because any command can vomit enough drones with guns to just drown anything in blood without having to call up for backup from another.
Chinese armies are Zerg armies…
Kayden Evans
Germany has a tougher time outfitting their army than China, picrel is an AFV with a green painted broom handle for a MG. Remember the West abandoned industrial economy for a (((service economy))), whereas China gobbled up all that industrial niche.
Brayden Lee
What happened to those cold war guns?
Gavin Watson
What if the the Nayirah massacre did happen but it was perpetrated by Mossad glowniggers?
Dylan Turner
Says the whine ass who's nation tags along on every outing the US has to kill brown people and who's own nation has it's own shit-tier combat record killing people on a whim.
Brandon Butler
Dude, that's a FLW with a GMW, not a fucking broom.
Michael Thompson
They sold them.
Ever seen weapons made in Germany sold abroad for cheap since 1991?
Nearly all of them aren't new, they're simply refurbished German Heer cold war stockpile.
Sell the stockpile for 30 years, break a minimum of shit in training and there is just nothing left.
Note that the same hold true for about every other NATO nation…
One of the reason why everyone is buying HK new 1960's designed guns is because everyone has run out of the 1970's/1980's guns…
Nolan Diaz
Melted down to make sieg heiling dog statutes.
Adam Hernandez
Tyler Walker
What's with the smaller French carrier (Jeanne d'Arc)? Is that just a helicopter ship?
Joshua Gutierrez
...
Carter Taylor
OK calm down, germany stronk
Blake Russell
It's a retarded pic.
France has 1 CVN the CdG and 3 Mistral-class LHD.
The Jeanne was a cold war ship type that doesn't exist anymore and were the spiritual ancestors of the LHD called "Helicopter Cruisers".
It was still in service because it was a school ship, not a combat ship.
Logan Robinson
US Boomers receive EAM from COMSUBLANT/COMSUBPAC via VLF that's a retrans of priority traffic from STRATCOM concerning the defense posture and patrol routes of strategic fleet assets. Subs authenticate and verify EAM by use of mission specific alpha-numeric OTP (One-Time-Pads) kept under lock and key in the Weapons Section. Priority traffic is normally broadcast over all three systems, but subs primarily utilize VLF because VLF better penetrates seawater (ELF penetrates the best be requires enormous broadcast antennas which are a bear to maintain) and use of SSIXS or UHFSCS requires a sub to surface to receive/transmit, making it both a sonar and surface radar contact.
Those cryptic messages broadcast over HFGCS at 11175KHz are the same thing, but for silos and alert aircraft using HF, rather than VLF. Normally priority traffic is broadcast via UHF, but HF nets serve as a redundancy in the event UHF SATCOM has been damaged or disrupted, as HF requires more effort to jam. At one time silos and alert aircraft also received priority traffic via LF nets (because LF can transmit even during a RF darkout period caused by EMP, because LF waves travel along the surface of the Earth and is capable of some Earth) through the URC-117 Ground Wave Emergency Network, but with the end of the Cold War it was inevitably it was shitcanned.
Blake Carter
Continued
US Boomer fleet consists of 432 Trident-I C4 or Trident-II D5 SLBM, each carrying 8 or 12 MIRV respectively, making the possible target group selection as little as 3,456 target points and up to 5,184 target points.
ABM systems have a general failure rate of 25%, even the much vaunted A-135 and future A-235. Let's also not get ahead of ourselves, the A-135 and A-235 are impressive, but borrow heavily in concpet and design layout from the US Sentinel and Safegaurd Programs. Heck, the Don-2N radar blockhouse is direct rip-off of the PARCS blockhouse at the Mickelsen Safeguard Site in North Dakota.
Levi Reyes
The Don-2 is the evolution of the Dog House/Cat House radars the first one the soviet had was in 1959… long before even MAR was on a drawing board.
The soviet had an actually operational ABM (A-35) by the time the 1972 treaty was signed they had to have the radars to go with it…
Sebastian Evans
No it doesn't. There are 16 active boomers and they have what, 24 launchers? Even fully loaded that's only 384 missiles, plus it's actually 1-12 MIRV average of 6 times 384 looking at maybe 2500 warheads. Each is the Mk 400 at best, which is an 80s warhead with no real maneuvering or ECM ability, they can do a spread like a shotgun when reentering at best.
Most of the subs aren't like focused on one city either, even when attacking 1 country like Russia they would be split into multiple approach areas. North atlantic, south atlantic, indian ocean, south china sea, baltic, mediterranean, persian gulf, south pacific, north pacific, arctic….. In terms of concentration per area it's 1 sub. It's just not enough concentration to break through something like A135 or even a single battalion of S-400 of which Russians have dozens of in key areas. Yeah maybe if they concentrate they might take out a city or two…. but they're just not worried about the boomers.
By the way
MIRV just doesn't work like that, each missile is one target point, it can just spread out to cover more area to increase damage potential. It's not like a single missile can hit Moscow and St Petersburg at the same time. Not to mention it would actually be counter productive to distribute your attack. Think you're going to hurt Russia by bashing a few thousand small towns? Their economy might actually improve if that happened.
Nolan Murphy
Don-2 radar system may certainly well be a development from Dunya-3 system, but the use of the truncated pyramid design is a direct rip-off of the Micklesen Site design. The Don-2 wasn't even initially accepted when proposed, because of it's inability to differentiate between penetration aids and missiles, not until 1978 when "changes" had been made was it accepted.
ZMAR was in development in 1960, it was just folded into MAR-I when Nike-Zeus was cancelled. Let's not act as if the Soviets had some amazing developmental lead.
Nike-X was a perfectly capable ABM system, McNamera simply was a moron that insisted on keeping all eggs in a single basket.
We're both wrong, I had a nagging feeling my numbers might be out-of-date. So, I checked the current fleet data specs, only fourteen Ohio's are SSBN, the other four are SSGN.
No, the Trident-I C4 uses the Mk.4 RV with W76 warheads, not Mk.400. As of 2005, all Trident-I C4's are no longer in active service;
navy.mil
All current Ohio's carry the Trident-II D5, which carries the W76/Mk.4 or W88/Mk.5, both MIRV'ed with a maximum of eight warheads as lined out in SORT, but limiting each party to only 1,152 warheads in active service.
They not focused on anything, their target list depends on the SIOP. Majorly, even in a counter-value scenario the majority of target points will be military and industrial to prevent retaliatory action. City centers receive damage because they host the large majority of industrial areas.
I can appreciate the A-135 and S-400 as much as the next guy, but you're attributing both far more capability than they have, they're both terminal phased engagement systems. They're impressive, but be realistic. The navy claims the SM-3 ER can handle SLBM…and I'm dubious about that claim. The Russian's are very worried about the Boomers, because if not they'd be more than capable of wiping the US off the map with little concern of retaliation, because the Boomers are the only realistic wild card in the US nuclear arsenal. LGM-30's can be tracked right from their silos and B-83's and B-61's are limited by their delivery platforms range and penetration abilities.
Yes they do. The design of a MIRV isn't to target multiple targets over a extremely vast geographic area, it's to target multiple targets over a small geographic area. A sole warhead striking a facility on the West side of Moscow would have little affect to targets on Moscow's East side, the effects of nukes have vastly diminishing effect over large areas. This is why saturation is utilized to dig up hardened sites, but multiple unhardened sites over an area are more than capable of being hit and destroyed by MIRV from the same RV.
The entire point of the development of the MIRV was to give the ability to strike multiple targets in the same area, rather than unreliably hinge everything on the sheer blast over-pressure from a large yield warhead.
You're making the mistake of thinking cities are targets for civil collateral, they're only targeted for their military or industrial assets. The US wouldn't waste warheads on small Russian towns of no strategic or tactical value.
Mason Morgan
You neglected to mention the hair dye.
Tyler Wood
Or that she's cross dressing. I'll never understand the streloks that muh dik over sluts wearing camo and tacticool shit.
Ian Flores
It's a mystery.
Joshua Miller
Jace Price
Pictures like this reminds me that the world is ready to a good apocalypse.
Jaxon Brown
So close yet so far. What a waste
Lincoln Cook
Is that sarcasm? Honestly not sure.
Josiah Miller
What was the gulf war over anyways?
Jack Lewis
Iraq invaded Kuwait, who were one of Britain's biggest allies and customers at the time. Saudi/Israel also got spooked since Iraq had the 3rd largest military in the world and begged the US to come defend them in case Iraq attacked. US was happy to oblige to save their greatest ally and destroy an ally of Russia at the same time. Britain joined in to save Kuwait too. so we could sell them more tanks
Jaxson Anderson
Sucks that the Tsar Bomba was never put into active service.
Aaron Rogers
Also noteworthy:
Iraq had already occupied Kuwait completely for a while when the actual gulf war started.
It took a long time, lies about babies being thrown out of incubators and lies about chemical weapons to get the war started.
John Foster
Nathan Long
That looks physically slightly larger than the Tsar Bomba. It should have a slightly larger yield, especially considering modern technology.
Thomas Brown
There are lots of idiots who believe whatever they see on TV, and it turns out that there was a famous TV series set during the Korean War, that aired while the Vietnam War was going on.
Logan Ward
Just about everyone I talk to my age thinks M*A*S*H was set in vietnam. No point in correcting them since most of them don't care or know anything about the Korean war.
Ethan Gomez
They are. They had the ability when they launched FOBS, they had the ability in the 80s, and though they lost the ability for the following 20 years, they sure as shit have it again now.
The only reason Russia hasn't hit us is because they don't want to live in a nuclear wasteland anymore than the next guy, and there's still a tiny chance the politicians would get nuked in response so they aren't willing to take it.
You just used more words and less examples to say exactly what I said.
Meaning they can't hit two defense umbrellas at the same time, every one of those ~2500 missiles is going to have to be targeted on one location no matter how many warheads it has.
lol
Grayson Allen
to be fair, both were Ricenigger shitholes that were a drain of lives, money, and resources.
Cooper Roberts
I don't think they would modify it. Nuclear tests are a thing because warhead designs aren't exactly easy, so if you have one you know works you stick to it.
There is a shit load of ordnance designed to carry them but warhead design in itself can be counted on one hand for each nuclear power.
Ryder Morgan
...
Anthony Bennett
Then that means they don't hold a strategic upper-hand ("they're not worried about US boomers") like you repeatedly have eluded in your posts. The only thing that prevents a nuclear power from using it weapons is an equally armed nuclear power that has similar capabilities, the theory Mutual Assured Destruction. The only arm within the US Triad that has any level of autonomy and flexibility is our SSBN fleet.
Otherwise it would be a non-issue for the Russians, who could simply neutralize our LGM-30's prior to launch or intercept them during their mid-course or terminal phase absorbing whatever few do make it through their ABM shield. With their A-135 and S-400 any strike by B52, B1B, and B2 is out of the question in deploying B83 or B61's…making the SSBN fleet the ONLY credible threat to Russia and meaning it's the only strategic advantage the US holds in preventing the Russians from just glassing CONUS.
Yep, that's a rather common occurrence in debate, using greatly expanded detail and articulation to point out the flaws in a dissenting sides argument. You just did an extremely poor job at hashing out your points…
Which will be Moscow. No nuclear power is going to ignored a primary C4ISTAR target set to strike strategically less-important city centers for kicks, especially as the nuclear battlefield has been limited in deployable platforms.
Yeah, you're just a big book ol' knowledge to be shared.
Have fun shitposting.
Gavin Fisher
...