fiddy gfy troops

My job in the Navy had me studying the Soviet Navy, I knew all about their armament, crew size, propulsion, most everything the US knew about the Soviet fleet, I had access to.

Our tech I believe is beyond what their's is then and now, back then, they had a lot more of it. Their radar for instance I believe was better than ours, but that's all changed because of the war in Iraq and Afghanistan , war dollars means more upgrades.

Aircraft carriers have a major purpose in any chess game the president might play, no country wants one off their shore if they have a problem with the US. I got to tour the USS RONALD REAGAN when my daughter was assigned to it. Great ship and a force to be reckoned with!

Cyberseo, also, an aircraft carrier is part of a carrier battle group, which has quite the tactical nuclear weapons payload spread out over ships and subs.

I see what you are talking about but.. the price of what tactical nuke missile like "Яхонт" (SS-N-26 Strobile) is nothing comparing to the USS which will be sink with 99% probability (it's almost impossible to intercept something that flies 10 meters under water with 720 m/s speed) :2 cents:

The problem with your theory there is if it ever came to that the nukes would be flying. In this day an age there is always the possibility that the US could lose a carrier group by surprise attack of some sort.

However it would almost certainly only come by way of submarine attack using a nuclear warhead. If that happened it would be considered the same as a nuclear attack on US soil and the counter attack would be more than appropriate.

We however have 10 carrier groups the last I looked and I'm pretty sure any single one of them has enough nuclear warheads among their ships to take out all the major population centers with-in Russia or where ever and this doesn't even include nuclear equipped subs not attached to the carrier groups, which is the bulk of our sub fleet.

Attacking a US carrier group in that manor would essentially be the mutually assured destruction.

lol too funny.

Russia is also tight with China and China with North Korea so if war does break out we can count those 3 plus 90% of the middle east; Venezuela and Cuba to be some of the opponent

proxy wars have defined the cold war along with nuclear weapons proliferation.

Seems you didn't get it again. One tactical nuke should be enough for a whole battle group (because it's a nuke). On the other hand, it just plain stupid to use nukes against small aircraft carrier killer ships like "Москва" or "Накат". It's like a big elephant vs the .600 Overkill. Different sizes, different "prices" but not a single chance for a big one :2 cents:

You asked a question
I was trying to inform you that a carrier is a part of a larger contigent, helping you.

The funny thing about this? I want you to keep your head in the sand. Keep thinking your shit is 2014, why would I want a potential enemy to realize they are far behind with their military and military tech?

my initial post along that line was to lol at the first dumbass who thinks the topol would be effective against NATO forces in Europe.

So, carry on with your thinking y'all are 2014 and got your military on full lock. :1orglaugh:1orglaugh

As I said above, it case if the US aircraft carrier group will attack Russian forces (with regular weapon or with nuclear ones - doesn't matter), it will be immediately destroyed with the tactical nukes. That's the Russian military doctrine. We just just no other weapon than nukes against the aircraft carrier group. The US military are not stupid and they know it too. So ANY real use of an aircraft carrier group against Russia means a total mutually assured destruction with 100% guarantee. There are no doubts about that.

Excuse me.. Do you mean that NATO or any other forces are able to intercept Topol-M after the launch? Are you kidding me? :upsidedow

of course not. jeez, if y'all are going to start throwing weapons systems in the argument at least know the system and it's effective abilities and shortcomings and what it's designed and setup to do.

It's very hard to hit a bullet with another bullet. If you think that's easy, then you live in some fantasy world (I don't know what do you smoke, but it must be a real strong shit :)) There are no faster missile than ICBM. The only way to intercept it is to hit the launch system on the start. Topol-M needs less than 2 minutes to launch an ICBM from anywhere. It just can't be intercepted on a march (speed: 7,3 kilometers per second):

read up on the Topol, a 3 stage INTERCONTINENTAL nuclear weapon with a MINIMUM range of 2000 kilometers.

Yes, it is an ICBM and it's made to hit other continents or distant countries. I.e it targets the EU countries, the USA/Canada etc but not Moscow or Novgorod. So I didn't get your post, really.

When will the first GFY-er kill another GFY-er?
Civil wars, attacking neigbouring countries, threatning, showing muscles. propaganda.
And that all for a 'revolution' most people know nothing about and don't care about.

from all accounts, it's a weapon designed, built and tasked to strike the USA. Its 10 separate nuclear weapons warhead combined with a minimum striking distance make it a non-weapon against NATO forces due to the minimum distances required, including taking into account nuclear fallout. you can't use the weapon to strike an adversary within 2000km of your border, that covers Europe/NATO.

IN short, It's not a weapon designed to be deployed against local forces, i.e., Euro NATO forces.

Sorry, didn't get it again. I know it was initially designed to hit the States, but... do you know how many kilometers between Siberia and any random EU country?

Hint: try Google maps.

P.S. As about weapon for neighbor countries. Google "Искандер" (SS-26 Stone) for example.

again, I have no compelling reason to get you to believe that your tech is not uptodate/current, effective, etc. So sure, let's go with the notion that Russian military will drive those mobile topol trucks to Siberia so they can launch nukes to the border nations and then watch the nuclear fall out cover a nice chunk of Russia.

800 kilotons of nuke on that topol and your'e gonna drop more than 1 on your neighbors.

http://www.nucleardarkness.org/inclu..._firestorm.jpg

so you really think if 1 carrier group got nuked out of the water our government would end civilization on this planet by launching a ton of nuked at russia so they would have to launch a ton at the usa and all nato counties also ?

end the world over 1 carrier group ?

i dont think so.

i hope it never happens tho would be some scary shit :2 cents::2 cents::2 cents:

see the fallout prediction maps for an 800kt nuclear detonation for yourself

http://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/


Estimated total-dose fallout contours for a 800 kiloton surface burst with a 15 mph wind: ▼
Fallout contour for 1 rads per hour:
Maximum downwind cloud distance: 388 km
Maximum width: 87.4 km
Approximate area affected: 27,300 km²
Fallout contour for 10 rads per hour:
Maximum downwind cloud distance: 286 km
Maximum width: 61.5 km
Approximate area affected: 14,360 km²
Fallout contour for 100 rads per hour:
Maximum downwind cloud distance: 184 km
Maximum width: 35.7 km
Approximate area affected: 5,540 km²
Fallout contour for 1,000 rads per hour:
Maximum downwind cloud distance: 82.1 km
Maximum width: 9.81 km
Approximate area affected: 831 km²
Fallout windsock is 7 km from ground zero. C

Well, you would have to close enough to use it, would be hard considering the sonar in the US is far better than that of Russia. Carriers always travel in groups. The computer on the carrier can orchestrate the weapons of all the ships in it's group for it's protection. And if you are that close, would you really want to shoot a nuke? The distance one of those can travel is limited.

Which is why the US doesn't use nuke torpedo's

Subroc made better sense

Drive? They are already there (e.g. Иркутск)

You are too overestimate the danger of radioactive contamination. The modern nukes use the power of chain reaction very effective. It almost fully converts into a blast wave, heat, light and rigid radioactivity. So the contamination is minimal. E.g. one Chernobyl was worse than 1000 blasts of strategic nukes. Not by destruction (it was just a steam-gas explosion), but by the radioactive contamination. If you want, I can explain the Chernobyl case more detailed.

Both our countries made a countless test nuclear blasts on their own territories and, as you may note, you and me are still alive :) E.g.:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...Dog%29_002.jpg http://archure.net/p/NV_Nuke.jpg http://lensbased.net/blog/wp-content.../vegas_vic.jpg

There is a mistake in my post above (it was 2am here when I wrote it :)). Of course I was talking about cruise missiles (10 meters above the water, not under :)). So it doesn't have to be launched for a close distention. For example, the operational range of "Яхонт" (SS-N-26 Strobile) is 120..300 km. However its price is just uncomfortable with a price of aircraft carrier group.

Sorry for such a stupid confusion.

just out of curiosity: all this conversation about weapons is about stuff you know and public knows what about shit we do not know?

as much science fiction it may sounds how about intercepting missile with:

1. some laser (we don't know about it ofc but they may have it)
2. with coil gun (we know they have one cuz they let us know they have it)
3. with ionized with electricity gas "bullet" (tesla invention that supposedly (according to tesla's words) is so effective that it would stop war at all - and we all know tesla's jurnal is in possession of US)
4. now i know it may sounds very laughable but again i'm talking about SF: what about missile destroyed in the air by microwave effect caused by HAARP?

you've got better weapons that are actually designed and in place. but, sure, there's no law against your launching a topol from siberia to ukraine, but, your government has weapons actually designed for that purpose,

the fallout map predictions are realistic and based on current nuclear tech and it show all fallout moving towards russia from any nuclear detonation in Europe, due to prevailing winds. 100s of square miles of radioactive fallout, and you and I both know since the cloud of an 800kt nuke doesn't reach high enough altitude for the radioactive debris to decay before it falls back to earth, so an 800kt debris cloud is potentially more deadly than say, the tzar bomb fallout.

so if you and the other guy want to think it makes sense to use topols in close range nuclar strikes, and disagree that the nuclear fallout is of no importance to russians, who am I to argue.

This.......
http://www.quotehd.com/imagequotes/T...-be-fought.jpg

fact: your aircraft carriers and fancy planes are worth their weigh in scrap metal against bacteria...YES you would win IF they decided to fight you the ancient sticks and stones way...but only a stupid mother fucker without bacteria would fight you that way LOL

your military is only for 3rd world countries, americans have thin skin and are not ready for a real war of any type...

"afraid" of gay people? :1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

the gay community would like to think that they are important and that they are something more than a bunch of self privileged fags who want special rights over normal people who do not hold "normal people parades" and "str8 pride" ect...

reality: putin is 100x the man obama is and does not have to bend over to the interests of the bible slappers or the "gay rights" or "pro choice" crap that is the US pre election circus...whether a man takes a penis up his ass has little to do with politics in russia, and rightfully so...

fuck gay parades...

Lol. Typical Glen Beck Sean Hannity Right Wing simple minded ignorant bullshit. Even if you're joking, you sound ridiculous.

That's pretty cool. Too bad it has such a shitty name though. ;)

War Monger wet dream

so a serbian telling me to prepare for russians using bacterial weapons in a military invasion of the US mainland

http://www.vote29.com/newmyblog/wp-c...8in-1978-1.jpg

I like how when the agenda fits crucivicso, Americans are war mongers who start wars all over the globe

but when the agenda does not fit, crucifficso simply changes his sophomoric rhetoric and claims Americans are not ready for war of any type.

you in the usa?

You being the ignorant one, you do know that Putin tried this shit when Bush was in office and backed down?
Also, you think Putin would have even tried it when Reagan was in office?

This from a guy that lives in Canada?

http://static.fjcdn.com/pictures/Can...90_4424683.jpg

Russia has fallen behind in technology compared to the US, the anti-warfare systems aboard the carriers are very hard to get past, like I said before, the carrier controls the fire control systems of all the ships in the carrier group.

Cruise missiles have been around for a long time, my sub had the harpoon missile, subs now carry tomahawks.

where did i mention ground invasion?...the russians would not stand a chance in a ground invasion...this is silly, why on earth would they attack the USA?

the point is: you are an american in an elevator with a russian...you have a fancy space age weapon and the russian has an old world war2 hand grenade with the pin pulled in his hand and a rusty knife in the other...if the russian decides he wants to stab you for fun, then there is not much you can do about it...

yes the whole world is in this imaginary elevator and will die from this imaginary grenade, but the real point is that I find your aircraft carriers and fancy weapons just as amusing as that machine that the church of scientology uses to expel "body thetans" form its followers :1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

your army is just for 3rd world non nuclear shit holes...yes its good for your corporate government to force its "democratic" will upon the other 95% of the worlds population...but the russians you leave alone...its just how it is...

and there is no change in agenda...americans are not ready for a war with russia ever no matter how many bar stories you hear from marines ect...invading 3rd world shit holes with a super military is one thing, but russia is a completely different story...so is china...

You don't have a clue do you?

No ones Navy compares to the US's right now, NO ONE!

Our Navy was designed as a deterrent against the Soviet Union, which no longer exists

I have no compelling reason to sell you on how weaponized/militarized the USA has become or to teach you history of the American people in times of adversity. Nor to recall my previous posts pointing out that we currently have Russia fully surrounded militarily with more than 500 military bases, etc.

i do have compelling reason to laugh my fucking ass off at you comparing our military to the church of scientology and to suggest our military is comprised of nothing but sophisticated weapons that can't compete against a grenade in an elevator. :1orglaugh:1orglaugh

Americans are too fat to get out of their easy chairs and most will sell out the whole country for a new ipad. So I would not be staking any bets on whose population is more able to handle adversity.

But I agree 100%...Your navy kicks ass...no sarcasm I truly believe your navy could conquer all the oceans and seas and declare it US territory and there is little anybody could do about it...

except putin...he would need a little paper ship...on the paper he would write for example: I have 100 amps of ebola on US soil and like 10 sleepers who will walk trough subways left and right until it is waaaaaaaaaay too late LOL now fuck off with the ships or die...

And we both know that, facing certain extinction , or at best "the walking dead" scenarios, the US would retreat its waste of money, 3rd world deterrent, outdated concept navy theatrical group, in the face of real danger...

And yes your ships and planes really kick ass. You really invested in killing others no doubt about it.




@dynamo...

the grenade was in fact a metaphor :thumbsup

Check out http://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/


edit... I missed your other post, where you already posted the same link.


It's pretty fun to play with and lets you test the damage/fall out of all the known nuclear weapons on any city in the world.

It was actually a eye opener to me as to how small the actual damage range is. It would take quite a few missiles to take out a city the size of New York in terms of total destruction.

You can't read. I didn't compare Americans to any population. I simply stated it's silly to discount Americans in time of adversity and history proves that.

Unless Russia had means to vaccinate it's population from the same bacteria, you would be shooting yourselves in the foot. This is why the US didn't go with that sort of plan, because it would be just as devastating on our own surviving population as it would the targets.

You are talking about the guy who signs kill lists monthly right? He is arguably the most aggressive president we have had in a long time.

Who knows, if it didn't already happen

He also seems to forget how the American military has fully embraced drones. Not to mention the unreal world backlash from using bacterials.

How'd we even legitimize this as a fucking topic anyway? we're talking to a POS serb who is claiming the russians will use bacteria weapons against US and NATO forces in russian neighboring states?

:1orglaugh:1orglaugh:1orglaugh

fished in!