User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 6/12/2017 5:37:27 AM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Pretty sure public doctrine from china is to go after large population centers instead of military targets like our icbms. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
The problem is that under New START they are limited to 1,550 warheads (as we are) and they're going to have to nuke the shit out of our Minuteman III bases to get prevent them from launching. As you can see, those bases cover a lot of territory. They're probably also going to need multiple nukes for places like NORAD and our stockpiles, as well as our sub bases. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2017 5:39:24 AM EDT
[#2]
I am surprised at the lack of targets in California and Texas.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2017 5:43:08 AM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Lol Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
The problem is that under New START they are limited to 1,550 warheads (as we are) and they're going to have to nuke the shit out of our Minuteman III bases to get prevent them from launching. As you can see, those bases cover a lot of territory. They're probably also going to need multiple nukes for places like NORAD and our stockpiles, as well as our sub bases. Counter-Force wins the war, and saves lives (both yours and theirs, because if you neutralize their force wholesale you won't get nuked back). Its also way harder, you need accurate weapons, accurate pictures of targets. Counter-Value is a lot easier, but is really bloody, all you need is lots of Megatons or MIRVs and go to town. Mao once said something to the effect that China was willing to accept millions of losses in a nuclear exchange with the USA. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2017 5:47:20 AM EDT
[#4]
Oh ffs. Something like 90% of the population survives.
Edit. Not to mention, that of course, Chinese doctrine is not to nuke population centers and leave mil alone. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2017 5:58:18 AM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Oh ffs. Something like 90% of the population survives. Edit. Not to mention, that of course, Chinese doctrine is not to nuke population centers and leave mil alone. I merely said if you went Counter-Value, it would get bloody (and it would). I imagine that when Mao said what he said, Chinese Missile Tech wasn't sufficient to allow for Counter-Force targeting, and maybe ours wasn't either. No-one really knows which way it would go once the missiles begin flying though. The nukes have only been used twice, both times it was Counter-Value. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2017 6:01:03 AM EDT
[#6]
Good, NIMBY.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2017 6:37:32 AM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Good, NIMBY. This fallout will irradiate almost everything downwind, notably the main source of our food in the Midwest. Instead of being vaporized people will be either inundated by fallout or starve. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2017 7:04:13 AM EDT
[#8]
Hmnnnn Ft Bragg isn't on there..
I would think an Army Division, an SF group, a Corps command, Socom, Forcecom, and the red roof inn would be a great target. With the emphasis on FORCCOM |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2017 8:52:01 AM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It's probably already been said but the attacks on strategic nuclear facilities will produce huge amounts of fallout that will travel a long way downwind. Nuclear attacks on cities are supposed to detonate above the surface to maximize blast damage. Attacks against underground facilities (like silos) churn up huge amounts of dirt and debris that becomes fallout. This fallout will irradiate almost everything downwind, notably the main source of our food in the Midwest. Instead of being vaporized people will be either inundated by fallout or starve. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2017 9:08:01 AM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
@limaxray to the white courtesy phone Quote HistoryQuoted:
@limaxray to the white courtesy phone Quoted:
Yay, this same old boring topic. Let's cut through the bullshit. @limaxray  Attached File |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2017 9:08:24 AM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That list is a bit short. I'd bet they hit every MAC, ACC, and Global Strike base in the CONUS. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2017 9:09:46 AM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The problem is that under New START they are limited to 1,550 warheads (as we are) and they're going to have to nuke the shit out of our Minuteman III bases to get prevent them from launching. As you can see, those bases cover a lot of territory. They're probably also going to need multiple nukes for places like NORAD and our stockpiles, as well as our sub bases. Somebody paid attention in class. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2017 9:11:19 AM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
That list is a bit short. I'd bet they hit every MAC, ACC, and Global Strike base in the CONUS. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2017 9:12:38 AM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It's probably already been said but the attacks on strategic nuclear facilities will produce huge amounts of fallout that will travel a long way downwind. Nuclear attacks on cities are supposed to detonate above the surface to maximize blast damage. Attacks against underground facilities (like silos) churn up huge amounts of dirt and debris that becomes fallout. This fallout will irradiate almost everything downwind, notably the main source of our food in the Midwest. Instead of being vaporized people will be either inundated by fallout or starve.  Attached File |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2017 9:13:50 AM EDT
[#15]
I'd imagine they'd go for LA or NYC before some of those targets.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2017 9:14:04 AM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Wait, are the Russians going to hack our elections or nuke us? I can't keep up. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2017 9:15:01 AM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Little lacking as they would also target logistics. The gulf coast would be wiped out to limit the petro and chemical industry. Math time: 450 Minuteman launch facilities. 45 Minuteman launch control centers. 2 bomber bases. 2 sub bases. Roughly 15-20 nuclear command and control facilities plus an unknown "other" in the nuclear infrastructure (like Hill AFB). Figure all of the above are in the "absolutely must die" category. Probability of kill of a single weapon is always < 1, sometimes significantly. Which means if it's in the "must die" category, you'll need to get the Pk as close to 1 as possible...which means more than one weapon per. So, word problem for the student: 520 (ish) sites. Assume 2:1 and in some cases 3:1 targeting for each site. How many weapons are left out of that 1550 for a strategic reserve? |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2017 9:15:46 AM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Lol all it would take to stop our military is a small guided bomb onto the DFAS Cleveland server. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2017 9:18:13 AM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I suspect that there would be other targets near civilian populations centers; San Diego, Norfolk, Pearl Harbor and probably some overseas targets like Guam and Diego Garcia. But, I think that the logic is pretty good; if you're limited on the number of weapons then bombing NYC and Los Angeles is going to be counter productive. Counter-value doesn't encourage restraint. If I know you're going to roast my cities (instead of attacking my fielded forces) I'm not exactly going to be encouraged to avoid a war of attrition. Everyone understands striking military targets, that's just bizniss. Hit my civilians, now it's personal. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2017 9:18:56 AM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Map is not very well thought out. If Russia launches we will as well. Our nukes will be on their way before they hit our bases. More likely targets would be political and infrastructure. Ports and refineries and shipping channels. Medical centers and financial as well. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2017 9:19:48 AM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Why would our missiles be sitting in their silos during an all out strike? |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2017 9:20:42 AM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Targeting ICBM's is dumb. They're gone before your warhead arrives. Plus, allow me to introduce you to the word "preemptive." |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2017 9:21:14 AM EDT
[#23]
And that covers the mess on Page 1.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2017 9:21:37 AM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You're presuming they're following a counter-force deterrent plan, instead of counter-value. While a solid guess, we don't know for certain what they're doing. And holding entire cities hostage in counter-value deterrence has likely only increased its allure as cities have become more populated after the end of the Cold War. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2017 9:25:50 AM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I always love these threads. "There is no way the Humvee blinker factory in my town ain't on the target list!" "The 7-11 two blocks away used to be a coffee shop near the factory that built tires for the trucks that were used to transport supplies to an Army base that was close to another Air Force base that had nukes, so OMG I'm going to assume 2 million degrees Centigrade!" 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2017 9:27:14 AM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I thought during a nuclear war every decent sized city was going to get nuked, along with just about every military base and important piece of infrastructure? Is there some rule of conventional nuclear war that I'm unaware of, and only a few spots would get nuked? As mentioned previously, targeting cities discourages restraint. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2017 9:27:28 AM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Seaports Major air hubs Large population centers to drain emergency resources. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2017 9:27:29 AM EDT
[#28]
 Major and minor problems with this list:
1: Suppose the Russians violate the treaty and use some major additional weapons already on hand. 2: Cutler Maine ( I live very close) would be a wasted missile: those towers not only transmit VLF to interesting places, there is rumor that if that stops transmitting, which MIGHT happen if a nuclear burst happens some classified, likely fairly distance over USA, all net traffic would close down, fleet goes to war footing perhaps? 3. Perhaps only one 10 megaton detonation air burst would be sufficient to fry the electric grid. 4. We have no back-up large transformers, (@10?) with a current 5 year time frame to get, and no $$$ appropriations for, to acquire, and US does not have current capacity to build. 5. North Korea is working on perhaps this very scenario. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2017 9:28:00 AM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No San fransico No D.C No L.A No Seattle No Portland No Chicago No Memphis No Austin Etc etc Come on Ruskies/China/Nk if you're gonna do it at least do the common people a solid and purge our shitholes. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2017 9:28:13 AM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Its the law of supply and demand. There are far more military sites than there are nukes. If you were to launch on another nation would you destroy their nuclear assets and ignore cities, or hit cities and ignore their nuclear assets? |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2017 9:29:58 AM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That list is crap . The Russians have hundreds of nukes and are going to hit less than 20 targets ? Figure any major city over 500,000 people and any important military or transportation hub . The guy who made that map has no clue at all . Not even a idea how to find one Once again, math time: 1550 weapons. 520ish targets that HAVE to die, requiring 2:1 or more targeting. Leave some for the next firefight. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2017 9:30:25 AM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Lol. AWACS is about as useful in a nuclear war as France is in any war.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2017 9:31:37 AM EDT
[#33]
The Russians only need to nuke one target..........just one.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2017 9:31:57 AM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So their strategy is suicide. Ok. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2017 9:32:18 AM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
It takes less time to reload a silo than rebuild one. If I were firing I'd probably send a few counter force nukes to knock out the open silos, but I wouldn't dedicate too much more than that. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2017 9:33:44 AM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
For starters, hitting MAC bases is going to be tough. First step is building a time machine back to before 1992.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2017 9:35:33 AM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Big shell game. Mx and peacekeeper rail Garrison type launchers. Could be anywhere. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/73/Peacekeeper_Rail_Garrison_Car_-_Dayton_-_kingsley_-_12-29-08.jpg |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2017 9:36:41 AM EDT
[#38]
If nukes start flying I'm heading to Mexico. Nobody gives a shit about them.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2017 9:39:24 AM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So Russia is actually in compliance? HA HAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA Not a chance in hell Awfully hard to hide building something like this: 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2017 9:41:07 AM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
only 14 targets, eh? Russia has more than 14 weapons...I wonder who else might find this report interesting and only has 14 weapons...zomg! North Korea! Run fo yer lives. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2017 9:41:41 AM EDT
[#41]
And that's Page 2.
BRB, have to go change out the water in the mop bucket. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2017 9:49:28 AM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
http://i.imgur.com/sw1LI3l.jpg One of the techniques used by Greenpeace, Plowshares, etc. is to make sure that every American has a target nearby so they can feel threatened. This looks like one of their maps. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2017 9:50:19 AM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I see you haven't done your homework. Houston is home to the Texas Medical Center, (The Texas Medical Center, located in Houston, Texas, is the largest medical center in the world. It has one of the highest densities of clinical facilities for patient care, basic science, and translational research.) the Port of Houston, (It is the busiest port in the United States in terms of foreign tonnage, second-busiest in the United States in terms of overall tonnage, and thirteenth-busiest in the world.) home to several petrochemical plants, (The Houston metropolitan area comprises the largest concentration of petrochemical manufacturing in the world, including for synthetic rubber, insecticides, and fertilizers. It is the world's leading center for oilfield equipment construction, with the city of Houston home to more than 3,000 energy-related businesses, including many of the top oil and gas exploration and production firms and petroleum pipeline operators.) is quite up and coming in the financial sector, (Banking and financial services are vital to the region. Forty foreign governments maintain trade and commercial offices here and the city has 23 active foreign chambers of commerce and trade associations.) and is currently the third largest city in the nation. We are a prime target for a nuclear assualt, which means, we'd be very well fucked. Try again, bubba. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2017 9:56:19 AM EDT
[#44]
I heart @limaxray threads
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2017 9:56:59 AM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
IIRC Russia has around 6-7k warheads. I don't trust any treaty, plan on every state capitol and major city being hit. For example: there were 5,280 W68 reentry vehicles built for the Poseidon missile (predecessor to Trident). The last one of those was put in the inactive reserve stockpile in 1991. Not only is that weapon "inactive," we couldn't use it today, because the way that weapon talked to its weapon system was unique, and getting it to where it could be used by a current weapon system today would require so much rework it'd be easier to design a whole new weapon. In other words, it's Poseidon, so no hablo Trident or Minuteman or B2, so no worky. So, misleading and irrelevant number. The number you are looking for is 1550, which is the number of operationally deployed strategic nuclear weapons allowed by treaty. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2017 9:58:23 AM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
But major logistical spots like Houston, or Air force support bases are strangely missing. Perhaps in a limited nuclear exchange, some major cities would be left, but you would be sure in a limited exchange most military bases would be targeted. The fact that the entire state of Texas in that map is not blinked should make you suspect the source. Many airforce bases or sources of refinery capacity would be targeted for sure. My prediction is pretty much any city or metro area of 250-500,000 people are probably targeted and that would ensure the country would be pretty crippled for the long term. You can also be sure there would be multiple hits on the same cities to account for failure or possibility of shooting some nukes down. Just by hitting enough cities you would ensure all resources would be swamped, more than enough burn units taken out. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2017 9:59:04 AM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I live within 800 meters of Red Stone Arsenal's Gate 9 so I imagine if the balloon ever goes up I'll be ionized vapor. That being said, with 1550 deployed warheads (I'm fairly certain the Russians flagrantly violate this cap) I worry that if there is an exchange it is more likely to devolve to city smashing rather than a counter-force exchange. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2017 9:59:20 AM EDT
[#48]
Leave MT alone. Of course the fallout from Seattle will get us all...........
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2017 9:59:43 AM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yep, by the time they roast Bremerton and Bangor/SWFPAC, Seattle will definitely be a briquette. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/12/2017 9:59:48 AM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
ALong with a good number of dams, power plants, refineries, ports, and major industrial sites. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
