Juicy details of US military power

Given that a Scud is accurate to 5 metres and it's flight time is 7 minutes, how far do you really expect a carrier to have travelled in that time?
Out of nuke range? No.

China does not need air superiority. Human intelligence plus satellite data is enough except dense cloud condiditions.
Drones are also expendable. Subs undetectable. They have an integrated military every bit as much as you do.

SCUD, dooferdang. Same (*)(*)(*)(*) different name.

As we can see anti missile systems are not expected to work against ballistic missiles. Other countermeasures may be of some use. But multiple missiles may be launched simultaneously and should be expected to do so.

The scenario I more envision for these kill systems however, is one where North Korea is given them in the event of and in response to, US attack.

China will use nukes in any war with the US. As will Russia, France, the UK, India, North Korea, Pakistan or Israel.
We all will. Count on it. We aren't just going to play by whatever rules let you kill us. Sorry.

American military planners have radically altered their tactics and deployments and defence research to adjust to these missiles, they didn't do all that because they aren't (*)(*)(*)(*) scared of it. They did it because they are.

 

You areally arguing an impossibly.

It's impossible for Iran to develop a nuke. The whole reason for this shield was a fee of Iranian nuclear attack.

What makes your argument even more trash besides of the 2 possibilities listed is that Iran is not the agressor. In resent history, how many countries did big bad Iran attack with their missiles of bombs?


Your whole nonsense of an argument first starts with the impossibly of Iran currently reaching the US when they could barely reach europe.They can barely get into germany.

The next impossibly is that this nuclear threat is non existent as its impossible for Iran to develop a nuclear weapon.

Aside from these 2 impossibilities, your argument rest of a false notion that Iran is even a threat in the first place.


You have a baseless argument built on impossibilities.


Iran is not even a threat. It's in the process of establishing economic ties with Europe. And guess who is still trying to keep them from having peaceful relations still? Some companies are afraid to work with Iran due to fears of US retaliation.

 

The DF-21 is accurate to 5 meters against a stationary test target. It has been never tested on moving targets. Again, its a ballistic target dropped from space, where the seeker turns on to home on to the carrier. If the ballistic missile's drop is too far off from where the carrier move, the missile won't lock on to anything but the ocean itself. Also if there is too much clutter, such as airplanes in the air, or islands, or jamming sources the missile will likely lock on to those as well and go for another target than the carrier.

No. A SCUD and DF-21 is totally different beast. A SCUD is a TBM with no terminal homing capabilities so they are not anti-ship ballistic missiles. A DF-21 is a MRBM with active radar homing seeker. The DF-21 and DF-26 are the few antiship ballistic missiles in the world.
Look at how you sound. Imagine me calling a Minuteman missile a Polaris. Or a aircraft carrier a destroyer.

As I explained the limitations of satellites. They can't see jack, the reason why militaries still rely on spy planes, not your star trek fantasy.
You need air superiority for your drones to operate. Otherwise they get knocked out of the sky.
Yeah human intelligence in the sea...what China has mermaids?
Submarines can still be detected by sonar planes in the air which operate far from carriers. Also by other submarines....

No. MRBM and TBM are quite easily defeated by SM-3 since they are slower and quite short ranged as proven in tests. Anti-ICBM technology is something that is hard to master with US technology now, due to the sensors required and cost. Ballistic missiles in general are designed to hit strategic stationary targets, not moving ones since they are fired ballistically, their coordinates are all added in before the a launch.

Really? Why didn't China uses nukes against the Soviet Union back when they fought? Because the Soviets had nukes. Nukes are a last resort such as if US invaded China and was winning. A nuke in a limmited encounter can kill Chinese fisherman in the area, knock out a tourist boat, and with even an Chinese victory, the whole world will not look at China good if they used it first. Also if a nuclear blast may knock out a SSBN communications accidentally, they may trigger fail-deadly, where the Sub commander retaliates on his own command. It's too risky.

Oh yeah? Well Chinese Commanders have no experience in any war, corrupt as hell(Xi Jinping agrees), and make horrible analysis(they predicted Gaddafi would never be captured, Saddam would never fall etc.)

Missile Defense isn't new. Countermeasures are not new. There is no radical adjustment.

 

For the last time.....missile does not equal nuclear missile

So a missile launch on Europe is impossible correct? Even accidents? Okay, dismantle your S-500s.

 

Keep in mind that Moder top secret latest and greatest, military spy satellite is not Google earth.

 

For the last time. The whole rhetoric that was used to justify this missile shield was Iranian nuclear threat. I can pull piles, upon piles of western news sources from 2004-2012 that talk about the nuclear threat of Iran and the bead for a missile shield. There are also many many quotes from politicians reinforcing this rhetoric.

There is no nukes nor is there a threat. Saying that Iran is a threat simply because they have missiles from the 60s or the 70s that can reach some places is in Europe is like calling US a threat when then have a shield that can be equipped with missiles that can hit some places in russia.

This twisted doublethink is yet another reason why your argument is trash

 

Why is Russia still using spy planes, drones, fighters with radars, ground radars when these magical satellites offer perfect coverage in your fantasy world?

Google Earth sees streets and faces so well not through satellite they are from cameras in the ground plus pre-mapped locations. Your comparison of a spy satellite to how awesome your resolution on your phone is just ridiculous.

- - - Updated - - -

Yawn..you're really are stupid are you? When did I say nuclear threat. I said ballistic missiles.

 

Who the hell is talking about you? You should learn how to read.


The whole rhetoric that was used to justify this missile shield was Iranian nuclear threat. I can pull piles, upon piles of western news sources from 2004-2012 that talk about the nuclear threat of Iran and the bead for a missile shield. There are also many many quotes from politicians reinforcing this rhetoric.


I was talking about the official story that our government has been feeding us all these years. In case if you still couldn't figure that one out. Who cares what you hace to say.


We can see galaxies and stars millions of light years away but we can't see detailed images of earth from high earth orbit. Riiiight.

And I wonder why the government is restricting companies from developing better quality when their quality is already so good?

 

And now it's for ballistic missiles.

 

3,000 m (9,800 ft) Scud A
450 m (1,480 ft) Scud B
700 m (2,300 ft) Scud C
50 m (160 ft) Scud D

7 minutes from where?

You don't need an anti-ship missile to nuke naval fleets.

 

They will do this only if they are willing to exchange nuclear weapons with the US.

 

It's funny how our government jumps from Using one story to the next. You are equally funny for following in those footsteps

Just shows how brainwashed you are

Saying that Iran is a threat simply because they have missiles from the 60s or the 70s that can reach some places is in Europe is like calling US a threat when then have a shield that can be equipped with missiles that can hit some places in russia. Well tomahawk are more of a threat than 40 year old missiles.

This twisted doublethink is yet another reason why your argument is trash

 

Says the guy who cannot cite a single example of a tactical reconnaissance satellite that operates from anything other than low orbit.

 

Yes it's very funny that I cannot cite information which is top secret.

The farther you can see, the farther out you can put your satellite

What's more funnier is that you think that modern spy satellite have no lenses to account for a mere 34,000km when a telescope that is 36 years old can see objecs that are millions of light years away. The farthest the hubble has seen was 13.4 BILLION light years away.

We're not talking about light years here but a mere 34,000km. The same 34,000km that you say that we can't see from.

We can even see the speed of light traveling in slow motion for crying out loud.

 

And yet you claim their existence.

 

There's no debate here. The US is the only military to use the most dangerous weapons on earth. Russia hasn't been heavily involved in a major conflict in a long time. They are a military with spiderwebs on them. Their soldiers malnourished, in extreme poverty. It's a running joke among all allied soldiers that we truly feel sorry for the Russians. In fact, we'd fight to help liberate them!

 

I'm sure you are right.

 

Why do we have any bases in France ? Does France have bases in the US ?

Humor Germany then should have twice as many bases in the US to defend everyone from the US should it not ?

 

Absolutely. And we will not hesitate to use them again

 

Straw man. So lame to talk in extremes. That was not the point. Clearly the point was that there is a limit to how big then navy needs to be.

One of the primary objectives of the Pentagon is to maintain the "necessary Illusion" that the 1 Trillion/year (not including interest) total military spend is justified. They are a propaganda machine.

Who cares such a biased, corrupt and conflicted source thinks ?

I agree with everything you say here other than the "you do not understand" claim. The problem is that this info has almost nothing to do with, and certainly does not address, the points made in my post.

What it does is address the straw man that you created.

 

The US has faster than light speed, can see any target on earth in realtime for any time frame, the US has missile rail guns capable of shooting down those Russian gods eye omniscient satellites at any time in a matter of seconds (that ones actually probably true) but I can't provide any verification for these claims due to the fact that it's top secret. See how that works?

 

Because the French want them there and we want them there to defend Europe from the overt expansionist goals of the Russian Empi..... *ahem* expansionist goals of the Russian Federation which has seen them invade and annex the territory of two of their neighbors in unprovoked wars of aggressive conquest against their peaceful neighbors twice in the last decade.

 

No wonder we are broke. All some country has to do is ask and we send over billions.

This would be laughable if it were not for the fact that so many actually believe this "necessary illusion".

France is a Nuclear power. That is what keeps Russia from expanding - not a few US soldiers playing tiddlywinks on a base.

Aside from the fact that this has zero to do with France ... it is jingoistic ignorance of what the nature of the issues were in relation to Crimea.

We did the equivalent in Kosovo ... just to keep pot from calling kettle black.

 

And Russia has a black hole generator that can swallow the earth. Let's be realistic here


The farther you can see, the farther out you can put your satellite

What's more funnier is that you think that modern spy satellite have no lenses to account for a mere 34,000km when a telescope that is 36 years old can see objecs that are millions of light years away. The farthest the hubble has seen was 13.4 BILLION light years away.

We're not talking about light years here but a mere 34,000km. The same 34,000km that you say that we can't see from.

 

Your entire position is based in your own unsupportable suppositions.
Thus, you defeat yourself.
Well done.