Posted on 11/01/2005 11:32:56 PM PST by HAL9000
Well, that is what the new warheads are for. To counterbalance the ideas like the one you posted.
It is called MAD - mutual assured destruction.
These weapons are built to never being used. I hope they will pass their time sitting in silos and underground hangars and will be scrapped when the time comes. They are just a warranty that there will be not so much dictating imposed on us, Russians. Well, unless our own gevernment becomes so corrupt it decides to sell their own country.
Russia needs to take a big chill pill. America is still a democratic republic, and unless Russia gives the American people a real good reason to think it has become a world aggressor once more, the American people will regard Russia with a yawn. China is much more a concern now. We don't like nuclear wars, they're messy and inconvenient.
A single "boomer" has enough nuclear (nukular)firepower to destroy the world. We can launch from anywhere in the world.
So they'll be selling this to Iran and Syria asap...right?
Send ALGORE over to Russia with more of our tax dollars quick. /sarcasm
This concept never got off the drawing boards. Our sub launched missiles are our only mobile strategic missiles.
Does a nuclear missile need big accuracy?
If you're trying to kill a nuclear missile in a hardened silo in South Dakota, yes.
If you're trying to hit Chicago (which is where I live), not so much. You set off a nuclear weapon inside the city limits, it makes a mess.
However, the Chicago City Council has outlawed transportation of nuclear weapons inside Chicago city limits, so if the Russians tried, they would be in violation of city ordinances.
Did I mention that Chicago aldermen are idiots?
That's alright. Our defence system is designed to seek a second target should it be evaded by in-comings. Secondary target is Pootin's anus.
I think the ICBM's targeting system isn't much different from the one of a ballistic missile.
As for city councils and nuclear weapons I know that it's illegal for an individual to own one in Utah. The mormons may have several wives, an A-bomb'd be good in maintaining peace in such a family :)
Sorry, I meant: ...different from the one of a cruise missile.
RE: Under the application of strategic purpose of Nikolay Solovtsova ordering rocket armies
I wanted to point out this specific language. We in the West would not talk of "rocket armies." To us, rockets are sort of a deadman switch, a fall back position of last resort. Anti Western forces, on the other hand, think of them as really big artillery.
We have nothing, in terms of anything more than lauchers for very short range missiles. The US has never properly invested in ground mobility. The leaders are the Russians and the Red Chinese.
But firstly, you assume a volley. What if the defender is attacked without warning and is so dramatically damaged that there is no real response possible? Secondly, you grossly overestimate the actual effects of realistic usage of such munitions. The greatest utility of nuclear strategic munitions is to blow huge holes in an adversary's strategic forces and in their command and control. I realize we in the West have been brainwashed by pacifists, utopians and intellectuals into imagining nuclear carpet bombing, last days spent on beaches in Australia and nuclear winters. Certainly, such notions provide drama, and give the pacifists and disarmament fanatics their perceived bully pulpit. Courageous are the men of the West who dare to challenge this orthodoxy.
No.
Since the late 1980s, the embargo of Western technology imposed on Russia has been all but shattered. Combined with their own up and coming native high tech industry, this has allowed upgrades.
The thing I'd be concerned about is two fold. Firstly, that the Russians have built and hidden "off the books" warheads and platforms in other countries besides Russia. And secondly, that some of the nuclear weapons being developed in China, and other countries, with the help of Russian engineers and scientists, are subject to sudden expedient acquisition by the Russians. Given the rise of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, horrible scenarios are possible.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.