Why is the gulf war so underappreciated in media?

That looks physically slightly larger than the Tsar Bomba. It should have a slightly larger yield, especially considering modern technology.

Attached: a6896d4f365dc6b93c4c1f602753e529569397755fc385dc76cf20c314ceecd0.jpg (2752x2120, 642.96K)

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.

Attached: mash.jpg (1434x918, 362.42K)

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.

Attached: Army ranger gun mage.jpg (1200x1200, 185.72K)

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

to be fair, both were Ricenigger shitholes that were a drain of lives, money, and resources.

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.

...

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.

Attached: 1492547786068.png (900x675, 933.62K)

...