China reportedly deploys ICBMs near Russia’s border

[RockstarChris]

So much this.

Watch the fireworks but stay the fuck out of it. Focus on our own borders and what happens inside them.

This is like the leadup to WW2. The worlds liberal policies burn the world down then America comes to save them.

 

[JDragon]

So, as expected the deployment of nuclear weapons appears to have slowed down.
80 over the last 10 years.
80 the previous 10 years.
about 400 the 10 years before that.

Or am I reading this wrong?

I don't think that is how this chart works. For example for the Minutemen III, you see 550 as the maximum number of deployed ICBMs, with currently 450 being deployed. But that doesn't mean they all were deployed at the "beginning of the bar".

Also, in any case still more than enough

 

[lecter]

Russia should just build a wall

 

[BVG]

This is like the leadup to WW2. The worlds liberal policies burn the world down then America comes to save them.

If these two go at it, there would be nothing left to save.

 

[RockstarChris]

If these two go at it, there would be nothing left to save.

The f-35's would survive.

 

[RockstarChris]

Russia should just build a wall

like i said earlier, every castle has a wall. for a reason.

 

[RockstarChris]

If these two go at it, there would be nothing left to save.

 

[Anung Un Rama]

I don't think that is how this chart works. For example for the Minutemen III, you see 550 as the maximum number of deployed ICBMs, with currently 450 being deployed. But that doesn't mean they all were deployed at the "beginning of the bar".

Also, in any case still more than enough

Its is an odd graph to glean anything specific from, especially the larger bars like the minuteman. Looks like anywhere from 80 to 200 missiles were deployed in last 5-10 years.

And that second graph, I think what you're trying to say is the world needs more nukes. Look at power Pyongyang

 

[Pale Man In Black]

From the article.

The alleged deployment of the DF-41 near Russia’s border should not be read as a threat to Russia, military analyst Konstantin Sivkov told RIA Novosti.
“DF-41 missiles placed near Russia’s border are a smaller threat than if they were placed deeper in the Chinese territory. Such missiles usually have a very large ‘dead zone’ [area within minimal range that cannot be attacked by a weapon],” he said, adding that the ICBMs would not be able to target Russia’s Far East and most of Eastern Siberia from the Heilongjiang Province.

The Kremlin agreed with the assessment, saying that China is Russia’s “strategic partner in political and economic senses.”

“Certainly, the actions of the Chinese military, if the reports prove correct, the military build-up in China is not perceived as a threat to our country,” said Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov.

Everybody just simmer down.

 

[ncordless]

Russia should just build a wall

It's going to have to be a really high wall to block intercontinental ballistic missiles.

 

[SouthoftheAndes]

This thread gs me the opportunity to post this nice picture.

If they were smart they would all unite and take over the world and divide it up.

 

[Armbars]

Wiwy?

 

[ncordless]

From the article.



Everybody just simmer down.

Well if Russian propaganda says it, it must be true.

 

[JDragon]

If they were smart they would all unite and take over the world and divide it up.

That's kind of what they did at least ca. 1955-1991, no?

 

[Pale Man In Black]

Well if Russian propaganda says it, it must be true.

You're an idiot.

 

[JDragon]

Its is an odd graph to glean anything specific from, especially the larger bars like the minuteman. Looks like anywhere from 80 to 200 missiles were deployed in last 5-10 years.

And that second graph, I think what you're trying to say is the world needs more nukes. Look at power Pyongyang

https://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/waltz1.htm

 

[Anung Un Rama]

https://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/waltz1.htm

After reading the title and no further I think I agree with the premise. Part of the reason I have no problem w/ Iran getting nukes is it would deter a disastrous invasion.
If Iraq and Kuwait had nukes 30 years ago the world would be a better place right now.

Unless the other 60pp of that links says something different in which case idk.

 

[JDragon]

After reading the title and no further I think I agree with the premise. Part of the reason I have no problem w/ Iran getting nukes is it would deter a disastrous invasion.
If Iraq and Kuwait had nukes 30 years ago the world would be a better place right now.

Unless the other 60pp of that links says something different in which case idk.

No, it doesn't.

IMO the article is pretty crazy. It is from 1981, people wrote articles contemplating whether a surprise first strike vs the USSR would be a good idea at the time.

If you care to read it, there also is a response called 'More will be worse' by Scott Sagan.

 

[GhostZ06]

No, it doesn't.

IMO the article is pretty crazy. It is from 1981, people wrote articles contemplating whether a surprise first strike vs the USSR would be a good idea at the time.

If you care to read it, there also is a response called 'More will be worse' by Scott Sagan.

Nukes wouldnt be used unless the lines were broken in Europe. Due to soviet numerical superiority its likely they would have pushed into France

 

[Anung Un Rama]

No, it doesn't.

IMO the article is pretty crazy. It is from 1981, people wrote articles contemplating whether a surprise first strike vs the USSR would be a good idea at the time.

If you care to read it, there also is a response called 'More will be worse' by Scott Sagan.

Yikes. I will read it when I get a chance. I do feel that that nukes would have been a good deterrent for Iran.