Posted on 02/02/2019 5:39:36 PM PST by Kaslin
Why are we allowing Bolton to take us to possible Armageddon against a country that does not seek to destroy us, while we are literally being destroyed here?
This is stupid.
“Hopefully, Im not being too naive here, but why are either of us flushing all of this money and effort into weapons that were never going to use?”
I guess we’re having to re-debate why having a good deterrent is a good idea when another country (actually, now, other COUNTRIES) can blow us off the map.
As for launching a nuclear strike at a smaller opponent, as was discussed regarding North Korea, thats a non-starter too. Any country who did that, including the United States, would immediately become an international pariah and potentially face a catastrophic military coalition forming against them.
Countries have interests, not friends.
Russia was violating the treaty.
Explain why we should abide by it, when Russia isn’t.
Priorities:
1. Stop the 2,000 Mexicans crossing our borders RIGHT NOW
10,000. Develop a whole new class of space-age weapons in order to threaten slavic people we have never met
Hmmm......hey, lessay we just put priority 10,000 first:
Whaddya say..?
ICBMs have been flying at “hypersonic” speeds for decades now. Why the hoopla?
Treaty violations are an indication of seeking to destroy us. And the onus is not on Bolton.
“There are only two scenarios I continue to worry about in terms of a nuclear conflagration.”
This guy never read “Failsafe.”
Hypersonic on a ballistic trajectory translates into a half hour or so of radar tracking time.
Hypersonic at a few 10s of thousands of feet above ground level means that an incoming warhead shows up on radar over the horizon with only a few minutes or seconds before impact.
Not much time to verity it’s really incoming, decide to activate interceptors, get a valid targeting solution, and fire away.
Exactly, And they are not cheap. This is just a whole lot of chest bumping when we know neither is really going to throw a blow. Can’t afford to, all “the old stuff” already in stock will work just fine to wipe everyone off the map.
Like it or not MAD was a reason why the World haven’t seen another war and more bloody than two previous combined in 20th century.
It is somehow sad to see it flying out of window now.
Flying out? It’s coming home to roost.
Maybe I can build cruise missile parts again...
It might be good for business but newer technologies prompt changes to doctrines on using strategic weapons and these doctrines are yet to prove to be safe.
Do you advocate staying in a treaty when one side openly violates it?
Wouldnt that be the antithesis of everything Trump purports to stand for?
Can’t we all just get along. Peace and Love.
[”As for launching a nuclear strike at a smaller opponent, as was discussed regarding North Korea, thats a non-starter too. Any country who did that, including the United States, would immediately become an international pariah and potentially face a catastrophic military coalition forming against them.”
International opinion is way overrated as a deterrent.
Countries have interests, not friends.]
Why are we allowing Bolton to take us to possible Armageddon against a country that does not seek to destroy us, while we are literally being destroyed here?
**************************
Ahh....China.
IMHO, thats the unspoken reason for this action.
ICBMs have been flying at hypersonic speeds for decades now. Why the hoopla?
************************************************
Susceptibility to successful interception. That will be the main difference between the ICBMs and the new delivery vehicles.
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.