ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Non-USA & General Politics
 

Notices


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 6th March 2018, 11:52 AM   #41
Jim_MDP
Philosopher
 
Jim_MDP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: N.Cal/S.Or
Posts: 6,310
Originally Posted by Crossbow View Post
... However, it would be prudent to at least start developing some counter-measures now just in case such weapons are developed in the future.
For a "dirty bomb" terror/extortion missile?

Mid-air capture at Mach 2 plus?

Better call Scorpion!
__________________
----------------------
Anything goes in the Goblin hut... anything.

"Suggesting spurious explanations isn't relevant to my work." -- WTC Dust.
"Both cannot be simultaneously true, and so one may conclude neither is true, and if neither is true, then Apollo is fraudulent." -- Patrick1000.
Jim_MDP is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th March 2018, 11:58 AM   #42
Elagabalus
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 2,424
Da, maybe time to send red mommy bear back to stone age ...
Elagabalus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th March 2018, 12:10 PM   #43
Crossbow
Seeking Honesty and Sanity
 
Crossbow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Charleston, WV
Posts: 11,841
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Concerned about what, though? You mentioned countermeasures as a point of concern, but now you acknowledge that countermeasures do exist. Are you still concerned about not having countermeasures for cruise missiles?

And what exactly would Trump say, to allay your concerns (whatever they are)?
While some of the counter-measures do exist, I seriously doubt that they have been looked at in regards to what Putin was describing.

As to Trump, the best thing that Trump could say would be that he is quitting and going back to his gold plated penthouse in New York city forthwith.

Failing that, he could at least provide the authority and direction to carefully analyze what Putin said to at least determine if it is feasible or not in the near future. Also, Trump could authorize a series of war games to get an idea of how such weapons could actually be used.

Neither of these things should be too terribly costly or difficult for the military to accomplish. After all, this is one of the sorts of things that they are supposed to be doing.
__________________
08 JAN 2018 > Trump says that he is "Like, Really Smart" and that he is "a Very Stable Genius".
11 JAN 2018 > During an Oval Office meeting, Trump asks "“Why are we having all these people from ****hole countries come here?”"

A man's best friend is his dogma.

Last edited by Crossbow; 6th March 2018 at 12:12 PM.
Crossbow is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th March 2018, 01:25 PM   #44
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 27,149
Originally Posted by Crossbow View Post
While some of the counter-measures do exist, I seriously doubt that they have been looked at in regards to what Putin was describing.
Putin is describing a supersonic cruise missile with a novel propulsion system. Cruise missile countermeasures do, in fact, exist.

Unless you're talking about something to safely contain the exposed reactor, after the missile is shot down. In which case, perhaps we can start worrying about that once the Russians demonstrate a working prototype of the engine.

Quote:
Failing that, he could at least provide the authority and direction to carefully analyze what Putin said to at least determine if it is feasible or not in the near future. Also, Trump could authorize a series of war games to get an idea of how such weapons could actually be used.

Neither of these things should be too terribly costly or difficult for the military to accomplish. After all, this is one of the sorts of things that they are supposed to be doing.
Meet the 3M-54 Kalibr: It's a supersonic Russian cruise missile. Between October 2015 and October 2016, the Russians launched over fifty of them in the Syrian conflict.

The Russians claim it can carry a nuclear warhead. Did it concern you at all that President Obama did not "provide the authority and direction to carefully analyze" the feasibility of this? Did it concern you at all that President Obama did not "authorize a series of war games to get an idea of how such weapons could actually be used"?

Or how about the DF-26? It's a Chinese IRBM. They claim it can carry a hypersonic, maneuverable, nuclear warhead. It was originally expected to be in service in 2013, and is likely to have been in service since late 2015. Again, did it concern you much that President Obama didn't publicly order feasibility studies and wargames in response?

I mean, these are actual real nuclear weapons. Their existence was not simply announced in a propaganda cartoon. They have gone through observable processes of design, test, and manufacture. Where's the corresponding Presidential angst that you seem to expect?

And it's not like nuclear weapons employment is a mysterious new subject. The study of their use has been ongoing for decades. Bombs, cruise missiles, ballistic missiles--all of these have been considered. Even torpedoes, mortars, land mines, and anti-aircraft missiles have been studied. Hell, the US studied the usage of exactly this kind of weapon. Right now, the Pentagon probably knows more about it than the Kremlin does. And that's without the President having to lift a finger or say a single word.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th March 2018, 01:55 PM   #45
Alphaba
Optical Allusion
 
Alphaba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 748
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
Do people think ICBMs are stoppable (with any degree of consistency or reliability) now?

Considering that an ICBM's "bus" follows a suborbital flightpath at an altitude of ~1,000 km at ~23,000 km/h, and that the the reentry vehicles/warheads it releases have a terminal velocity of Mach 13-17, no currently deployed ABM systems can stop either the "bus" or the warheads.

The only way would be to destroy the ICBM during the ascending phase, which is why their launch sites (either static or mobile) are located out of reach of whatever existing ABM system.

Only in lalaland can ICBMs be stopped.
Alphaba is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th March 2018, 02:08 PM   #46
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 27,149
I count at least three currently-deployed systems capable of intercepting ICBMs outside of their launch phase.

Oh, and some Aegis interceptors can also intercept ICBMs in midcourse and terminal phases of flight.

ETA: Actually, that may not be true. The wikipedia article is pretty emphatic that Aegis cannot intercept ICBMs. But the section on the Block IV interceptors talks about both terminal phase and exoatmospheric interceptions. On the other hand, the Aegis system is certainly capable of intercepting cruise missiles.

Last edited by theprestige; 6th March 2018 at 02:16 PM.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th March 2018, 02:26 PM   #47
Alphaba
Optical Allusion
 
Alphaba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 748
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
I count at least three currently-deployed systems capable of intercepting ICBMs outside of their launch phase.

Oh, and some Aegis interceptors can also intercept ICBMs in midcourse and terminal phases of flight.

ETA: Actually, that may not be true. The wikipedia article is pretty emphatic that Aegis cannot intercept ICBMs. But the section on the Block IV interceptors talks about both terminal phase and exoatmospheric interceptions. On the other hand, the Aegis system is certainly capable of intercepting cruise missiles.
AFAIK, none of the currently existing ABM missiles can reach the 1,200 km altitude of an ICBM "bus" and none can reliably intercept a Mach 10+ incoming warhead.
The Soviet/Russian system was just a nuclear "spray and pray" umbrella-like system (currently replaced).
Alphaba is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th March 2018, 02:51 PM   #48
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 27,149
Originally Posted by Alphaba View Post
AFAIK, none of the currently existing ABM missiles can reach the 1,200 km altitude of an ICBM "bus" and none can reliably intercept a Mach 10+ incoming warhead.
The Soviet/Russian system was just a nuclear "spray and pray" umbrella-like system (currently replaced).
I don't see why the speed of the warhead is relevant. And being unreliable is very different from only existing in "lalaland".
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th March 2018, 03:17 PM   #49
Cleon
King of the Pod People
 
Cleon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 25,556
Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
Of course making claims of super advanced technology that turns out to be a bunch of lies is old Russian custom.....
They didn't fake tsar bomba. Or if they did, they somehow sold the US on playing along.

And really, everything after that is sorta pointless. It's MAD even if only one side launches.

"Oh, you can vaporize the entire world three times over? Well, we can vaporize it four times over!"
__________________
"People like me are what stand between us and Auschwitz." - Newt Gingrich
Cleon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th March 2018, 06:34 PM   #50
Norman Alexander
Master Poster
 
Norman Alexander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 2,572
Isn't Donny-boy Pooty's "unstoppable nuclear weapon"?
__________________
...our governments are just trying to protect us from terror. In the same way that someone banging a hornets’ nest with a stick is trying to protect us from hornets. Frankie Boyle, Guardian, July 2015
Norman Alexander is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th March 2018, 07:11 PM   #51
Venom
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: United States
Posts: 1,290
Did the Navy abandon their rail gun project? I'm still waiting.

Have that Mach 5 thing shoot down these dreaded warheads.
Venom is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th March 2018, 07:12 PM   #52
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 27,149
Originally Posted by Cleon View Post
And really, everything after that is sorta pointless. It's MAD even if only one side launches.

"Oh, you can vaporize the entire world three times over? Well, we can vaporize it four times over!"
Depends on how much is launched, and at what targets, doesn't it?

Half a dozen low yield precision nukes to decapitate North Korea would hardly vaporize even that troubled peninsula, let alone the entire world. Especially if nobody else launches in response.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th March 2018, 08:56 PM   #53
Childlike Empress
Ewige Blumenkraft
 
Childlike Empress's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Ivory Tower
Posts: 15,808
Good rant: LETTER TO AMERICA - AN OPPORTUNITY AND A WARNING. THE CHOICE IS YOURS.

Originally Posted by Russell "Texas" Bentley
[...] Russia is not your enemy. We seek only cooperation for the mutual benefit of all Mankind. But since the fall of the Soviet Union in 1990, 28 years ago, the USA, NATO and the EU have sought to plunder and rule the world. They have been the enemies, the enslavers, the destroyers of the world. No reality based person can dispute that fact. There is no place that the US or NATO has gone into in the last 4 decades that is better off. Not one. In fact, there is no place that NATO or the US have intervened, (usually against international law) that hasn't become a failed state, hell on Earth for the citizens, and a genuine danger to the surrounding regions and the world. It is the US government and NATO, and the people who own and control them, who are the threats and the enemies to the future of Humanity. But their days of disregarding international law and destroying weaker nations with impunity are now over, as of March 1st, 2018.

The good people of America now have a huge opportunity, and a huge challenge. Russia spends less than one tenth what the USA spends on military and defense, but their military and weapons are superior in every measurable way. The waste, corruption and abject venality of the US military industrial complex has wasted trillions on weapon systems that are now literally useless, and which have left the US military (and by extension the American people) defenseless before the power of Russia's weapons, which are designed and produced to be effective rather than profitable. The opportunity is this - the USA can now reduce its military spending (the highest in the world) by 90% and still be safer than you are right now, spending almost a trillion dollars a year on useless weapons and a defenseless military. Safer, because as soon as the American People take control of their government enough to reduce your spending to ONLY as much as Russia spends, Russia will stop having reason to see the USA as an existential threat. The less you spend, the safer you will be. The more you spend, the more likely World War Three, which will see you as the instigators and the losers. This gives the USA, starting as soon as you want, an extra $800 billion, per year, to spend on things that have actual worth, things you really need. Health care, free college education, fixing the rotting economy and infrastructure that are daily becoming more of a threat to the American people than Russia has ever been. [...]

When the American People stand up to their oppressors, rid themselves of their parasites, the people of Russia and of the world will stand with you, will applaud and support you. All good people in the world are on the same side. Those who oppress and exploit you do the same to us. Your enemies are our enemies, and ours are yours. Stand up, as we have, throw off your chains and illusions, see for yourself who your real enemies are, and together let's defeat them, before they destroy the world and all that is good in it. Only you can stop them without a global war. If you don't, there will be war, and we will stop them. But those who live in the USA will suffer the fate of those who start and lose a world war. It is not a fate to be desired.

America, that time has now come for you. The choice is stark and clear, and you must make it soon.
Either bring your rulers to heel, stop the war they are bent on starting, and reap the benefits of stopping the most egregious and wasteful scam in history, or do nothing, allow your parasites to consume you, and let them lead you and your children and your nation to Armageddon and a fiery death in a war that you now know you can never win. The choice is yours. And so is the responsibility.

The author is as his callsign suggests from Texas, has fought on the side of the opolchenie against the Ukrainian putsch regime and is now living in the Donetsk People's Republic.
Childlike Empress is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th March 2018, 10:14 PM   #54
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 39,449
Originally Posted by Venom View Post
Did the Navy abandon their rail gun project? I'm still waiting.
Unfortunately it appears they have. They are, however, interested in using the munition developed for the rail gun, the hypervelocity projectile (HVP), since it can also be fired from conventional artillery, and at much higher velocities than conventional munitions.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th March 2018, 11:44 PM   #55
a_unique_person
Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning
 
a_unique_person's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Waiting for the pod bay door to open.
Posts: 38,822
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Cruise missile countermeasures are already a thing.

Ballistic missile countermeasures--for all phases of flight--are also already a thing, by the way. Not a guaranteed thing, but the technology does keep improving. So there's that.
No way you can shoot them all down. Not this century.
__________________
Continually pushing the boundaries of mediocrity.
Everything is possible, but not everything is probable.
For if a man pretend to me that God hath spoken to him supernaturally, and immediately, and I make doubt of it, I cannot easily perceive what argument he can produce to oblige me to believe it. Hobbes
a_unique_person is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th March 2018, 12:22 AM   #56
McHrozni
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 10,536
Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
What is the purpose of annoying a population during mutually assured destruction?
The point is such an attack does not warrant a full-blown nuclear response. It doesn't even kill anyone, not directly anyway. Will you destroy the world over an attack that only causes moderate property damage?

McHrozni
__________________
لا إله إلا رجل والعلوم والتكنولوجيا وأنبيائه
McHrozni is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th March 2018, 04:42 AM   #57
a_unique_person
Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning
 
a_unique_person's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Waiting for the pod bay door to open.
Posts: 38,822
Originally Posted by McHrozni View Post
The point is such an attack does not warrant a full-blown nuclear response. It doesn't even kill anyone, not directly anyway. Will you destroy the world over an attack that only causes moderate property damage?

McHrozni
Yeah. The world that has reached the state where flying around a cruise missile spewing radiation for months is not the same world that would launch a full nuclear war.
__________________
Continually pushing the boundaries of mediocrity.
Everything is possible, but not everything is probable.
For if a man pretend to me that God hath spoken to him supernaturally, and immediately, and I make doubt of it, I cannot easily perceive what argument he can produce to oblige me to believe it. Hobbes
a_unique_person is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th March 2018, 07:23 AM   #58
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 27,149
Originally Posted by a_unique_person View Post
No way you can shoot them all down. Not this century.
That's pretty much what I said.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th March 2018, 10:12 AM   #59
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 39,449
https://twitter.com/DPRK_News/status/969277497664778240
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th March 2018, 10:33 AM   #60
ceptimus
puzzler
 
Join Date: May 2003
Posts: 5,315
At Mach 3 pulling a steady 5g turn the diameter of the circle is about 40 kilometres. For a missile to 'circle over a city at Mach 3' it would need to pull several tens of g.
ceptimus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th March 2018, 11:10 AM   #61
Dr. Keith
Not a doctor.
 
Dr. Keith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Texas
Posts: 15,760
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Putin is describing a supersonic cruise missile with a novel propulsion system. Cruise missile countermeasures do, in fact, exist.

Unless you're talking about something to safely contain the exposed reactor, after the missile is shot down. In which case, perhaps we can start worrying about that once the Russians demonstrate a working prototype of the engine.



Meet the 3M-54 Kalibr: It's a supersonic Russian cruise missile. Between October 2015 and October 2016, the Russians launched over fifty of them in the Syrian conflict.

The Russians claim it can carry a nuclear warhead. Did it concern you at all that President Obama did not "provide the authority and direction to carefully analyze" the feasibility of this? Did it concern you at all that President Obama did not "authorize a series of war games to get an idea of how such weapons could actually be used"?

Or how about the DF-26? It's a Chinese IRBM. They claim it can carry a hypersonic, maneuverable, nuclear warhead. It was originally expected to be in service in 2013, and is likely to have been in service since late 2015. Again, did it concern you much that President Obama didn't publicly order feasibility studies and wargames in response?

I mean, these are actual real nuclear weapons. Their existence was not simply announced in a propaganda cartoon. They have gone through observable processes of design, test, and manufacture. Where's the corresponding Presidential angst that you seem to expect?

And it's not like nuclear weapons employment is a mysterious new subject. The study of their use has been ongoing for decades. Bombs, cruise missiles, ballistic missiles--all of these have been considered. Even torpedoes, mortars, land mines, and anti-aircraft missiles have been studied. Hell, the US studied the usage of exactly this kind of weapon. Right now, the Pentagon probably knows more about it than the Kremlin does. And that's without the President having to lift a finger or say a single word.
Did the Russians or Chinese put out state media propaganda that showed these missiles being used against the US during the Obama era? I don't know if that changes things, but it does seem a bit like Putin feels a bit less restrained as of late.
__________________
I once proposed a fun ban.

Suffering is not a punishment not a fruit of sin, it is a gift of God.
He allows us to share in His suffering and to make up for the sins of the world. -Mother Teresa
Dr. Keith is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th March 2018, 11:15 AM   #62
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 27,149
Originally Posted by McHrozni View Post
The point is such an attack does not warrant a full-blown nuclear response.
It absolutely does. I think the thread of MAD is the only reasonable response to the existence of such a weapon.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th March 2018, 11:33 AM   #63
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 27,149
Originally Posted by Dr. Keith View Post
Did the Russians or Chinese put out state media propaganda that showed these missiles being used against the US during the Obama era? I don't know if that changes things, but it does seem a bit like Putin feels a bit less restrained as of late.
I don't think it matters. But the Russians and the Chinese (and the Americans) do regularly publish propaganda showing their wunderwaffen in action. Sometimes the enemies are more specifically identifiable than others, but the message of course is always clear.

As for Putin feeling less restrained--less restrained than what? Less restrained than when he annexed Crimea and invaded eastern Ukraine? Less restrained than when he orders the assassinations of rogue agents? Less restrained than when he allied with Assad in Syria?

This video was made for internal consumption. To me that seems like Putin probably feels a bit more constrained as of late. You don't unleash propaganda cartoons on your own populace out of a free and easy sense of your position.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th March 2018, 11:36 AM   #64
ponderingturtle
Orthogonal Vector
 
ponderingturtle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 43,142
Originally Posted by McHrozni View Post
The point is such an attack does not warrant a full-blown nuclear response. It doesn't even kill anyone, not directly anyway. Will you destroy the world over an attack that only causes moderate property damage?

McHrozni
So what is the supposed response to nuclear terror weapons?
__________________
Sufficiently advanced Woo is indistinguishable from Parody
"There shall be no *poofing* in science" Paul C. Anagnostopoulos
Force ***** on reasons back" Ben Franklin
ponderingturtle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th March 2018, 11:40 AM   #65
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 27,149
Originally Posted by ponderingturtle View Post
So what is the supposed response to nuclear terror weapons?
Wait for the cancer, apparently.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th March 2018, 05:52 PM   #66
mgidm86
Illuminator
 
mgidm86's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 4,799
It's a game of nuclear Whack-A-Mole. Smack down NK and Russia pops up the same day. Smack Putin on the noggin and up will pop Iran. Tough talk - all baloney. These countries are happy to use their posturing to please their masses. I will sleep well tonight.
__________________
Franklin understands certain kickbacks you obtain unfairly are legal liabilities; however, a risky deed's almost never detrimental despite extra external pressures.
mgidm86 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th March 2018, 06:13 PM   #67
dudalb
Penultimate Amazing
 
dudalb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 39,470
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
I don't think it matters. But the Russians and the Chinese (and the Americans) do regularly publish propaganda showing their wunderwaffen in action. Sometimes the enemies are more specifically identifiable than others, but the message of course is always clear.

As for Putin feeling less restrained--less restrained than what? Less restrained than when he annexed Crimea and invaded eastern Ukraine? Less restrained than when he orders the assassinations of rogue agents? Less restrained than when he allied with Assad in Syria?

This video was made for internal consumption. To me that seems like Putin probably feels a bit more constrained as of late. You don't unleash propaganda cartoons on your own populace out of a free and easy sense of your position.
I notice you avoid the topic of Russian Interfence in US..and other countries elections...reflect badly on Dear Leader in the White House.
__________________
Pacifism is a shifty doctrine under which a man accepts the benefits of the social group without being willing to pay - and claims a halo for his dishonesty.

Robert Heinlein.
dudalb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th March 2018, 06:17 PM   #68
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 27,149
Originally Posted by dudalb View Post
I notice you avoid the topic of Russian Interfence in US..and other countries elections...reflect badly on Dear Leader in the White House.
Lol. Don't let your hardon for Trump get in the way of you posting on topic in this thread.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th March 2018, 02:15 PM   #69
jimbob
Uncritical "thinker"
 
jimbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 17,836
Originally Posted by Dr.Sid View Post
US had nuclear powered bomber program. It only had one problem. Lot of radiation pollution along the fly-path. That might not be an issue in nuclear tipped cruise missile.
If you consider how good Tomahawk missile is .. it's possible that the proposed Russian missile would be not much bigger, at least slightly supersonic, and with practically unlimited range. Could be scary.
The 1950's called, they want their bad ideas back

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supers...titude_Missile
__________________
OECD healthcare spending
Expenditure on healthcare
http://www.oecd.org/els/health-systems/health-data.htm
link is 2015 data (2013 Data below):
UK 8.5% of GDP of which 83.3% is public expenditure - 7.1% of GDP is public spending
US 16.4% of GDP of which 48.2% is public expenditure - 7.9% of GDP is public spending
jimbob is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Non-USA & General Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:46 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.