Well we know Putins ICBMs won't fail in their silos

So what's next ATS think tank members...

Biden's DoD insisting that Ukraine needs ICBMs to compete with Russia?

for the children of the Cold War ICBMs being used was once considered the crossing of the "Rubicon" the opening of Pandoras box. Seems we are stuck in an endless loop of participants going look what I can do.



url]https://x.com/OsintWWIII/status/1859575338977632432[/url]

OSINT WWIII
@OsintWWIII
A few hours ago, Russian President Vladimir Putin launched an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) attack on #Ukraine, his neighboring country. Reports indicate that between 12 and 16 ICBMs equipped with conventional warheads were fired.

Footnote: Beyond signaling Russia’s readiness to confront #NATO, this act demonstrated the precision and operational readiness of its ICBMs. It also underscored Russia’s apparent willingness to escalate global tensions toward a nuclear World War III.

Message: In these uncertain times, fastening your seatbelts may not offer a solution. Instead, take a moment to relax and cherish life—humanity seems to be approaching a critical point of no return.

a reply to: putnam6

Reeks of desperation on the part of Russia.

And not exactly what one would call a cost-effective solution by any manner or means.

a reply to: putnam6

Well, first of all, Biden isn't doing a damn thing. We all know it's not him calling the shots.

2nd - Moving ICBMs into Ukraine will guarantee an escalation from Putin. He's already threatened the use of nuclear weapons and if he's sees nuclear capable missiles being brought in, he may try a preemptive strike.

The Democrats/war hawks are about to get us in some sh** we don't need.


Jan 20th can't come fast enough.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: putnam6

Reeks of desperation on the part of Russia.

And not exactly what one would call a cost-effective solution by any manner or means.

Desperate or not isn't the question, nor is cost-effectiveness. I counted 6 ICBMS hitting in a cluster in Ukraine.

What's NATO's response...

what's next...

Will this finally shut up the armchair generals who think we should go to war with Russia and just gamble that their nukes won't work?

a reply to: putnam6

Well, that's 6 down any road, 764 to go.

They did not hit NATO putnam6.

They used an ""intercontinental"" ballistic missile plus accompanying warheads to hit their closest neighbors.

As to whats next?

My guess would be another show of Russian force which will amount to more clown shoes.

NATO won't flinch, and neither by the looks of it will Ukraine.

originally posted by: DAVID64
a reply to: putnam6

Well, first of all, Biden isn't doing a damn thing. We all know it's not him calling the shots.

2nd - Moving ICBMs into Ukraine will guarantee an escalation from Putin. He's already threatened the use of nuclear weapons and if he's sees nuclear capable missiles being brought in, he may try a preemptive strike.

The Democrats/war hawks are about to get us in some sh** we don't need.


Jan 20th can't come fast enough.

I said Biden's DoD as in the people in charge were selected by the Biden administration, no more no less. I have no problem entertaining the decisions being made are not by Biden, but they are by the same DNC apparatus that installed Biden.

Who that is exactly remains a mystery though we all have guesses

Why? Why is it desperation? Russia has the right to defend itself from the Americans, Hahaha. Desperation is Biden giving the go ahead to use long range missles in hope to further his agenda of all out war, that's where the money is. What do you suggest Russia should have done in retaliation to Ukraine using long range missles made by the US. a reply to: andy06shake

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: putnam6

Well, that's 6 down any road, 764 to go.

They did not hit NATO putnam6.

They used an ""intercontinental"" ballistic missile plus accompanying warheads to hit their closest neighbors.

As to whats next?

My guess would be another show of Russian force which will amount to more clown shoes.

NATO won't flinch, and neither by the looks of it will Ukraine.

I didn't say they hit NATO, only asked what NATO's would response be.

You suggest they will do nothing... OK

a reply to: putnam6

I suggest they will do exactly what they have been doing.

What i dont think they will do is rise to Putin's threats.

Again he simply looks desperate.

Entertaining his most inflammatory of antics would be simply playing his game.

Ok?

originally posted by: YourFaceAgain
Will this finally shut up the armchair generals who think we should go to war with Russia and just gamble that their nukes won't work?

Hopefully but they will likely move the goal posts...

a reply to: 320MPH

Because it looks that way thats why.

Me i suggest cooler heads prevail, but I'm not getting my hopes up in that department.

And why, because Ukraine does not wish to give up nor capitulate.

Also, the Storm Shadow and ATACMS are not "long-range missiles" do your homework please.

An ICBM on the other hand well that does tick that box.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: putnam6

I suggest they will do exactly what they have been doing.

What i dont think they will do is rise to Putin's threats.

Again he simply looks desperate.

Entertaining his most inflammatory of antics would be simply playing his game.

Ok?

LOL, better but that hasn't been the MO so far.

Im just discussing the topic here on ATS because I know we have members from the UK and Europe.

I have no idea and don't hazard to guess.

All I know is it's inherently dangerous to have ICBMs flying, no way of knowing what the payload is until it hits.

Personally, if he even uses a small tactical in Ukraine I believe it will escalate quickly to all-out war

the MIC seems to so desperately want

a reply to: putnam6

I think we are all guessing to one degree or another putnam6.

Its pathetic really.

I agree if he uses any sort of Nuke, tactical or otherwise.

What happens next will not be very nice, and thats quite frankly putting it mildly and goes for Russia same as the rest.

a reply to: putnam6

So far I’ve read that only Kyiv has claimed an ICBM was fired on them.

Looks like the US is disputing that (saying it was just ballistic), and I haven’t seen confirmation from other entities.

I’m wondering how sophisticated Ukraines tracking infrastructure is to differentiate.

That said, what would be the benefit for Russia to use these? Harder to intercept is the only thing I can think of, but I guess I’m not knowledgeable enough to know would these have a better success rate than hypersonic? One would think they would want to preserve ICBMs in the event of further global escalation.

I’m sure time will tell, but the US has been pretty hawkish the past week or two, I would think they would run with this if it happened.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

US satellite detection will most likely have detected the launch soon after or when it left the silo.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: CriticalStinker

US satellite detection will most likely have detected the launch soon after or when it left the silo.

It's inherently dangerous to fire ICBMs without assuring the rest of the world, they aren't nuclear-tipped ICBMs.

One would assume they aren't but it isn't 100%, what's to keep them from using another 2 dozen?

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: CriticalStinker

US satellite detection will most likely have detected the launch soon after or when it left the silo.

I'd imagine that set off a few alarms across the world, he had to let somebody know they weren't nuclear-tipped.

Quick, uh...... Quick question. Maybe I missed the memo?

Our current administration gave the OK for Ukraine to use long range missles against Russia - because when history shows a 4 year tantrum won't work against Trump, go big and try to instigate a full blown WW3 on your way out the door like a bunch of tardo children, right?

Anyway, we give the OK, and Russia retaliates..... So how is this Russia being willing to escalate tensions to a Nuclear WW3? And we fall right in line with them being the bad guys because... they hit back? This seems like some grade school bs where someone fights back and gets the blame.

I'm confused. Help me out. Logically, of course.

a reply to: putnam6

I have no idea what's next with the way things are going. Yet I'll suggest that Trump needs to sort things out asap. We in Europe and I guess in most of the world see the USA as the worlds policeman. The Biden regime has let Earth threatening wars break out in eastern Mediterannean and Eastern Europe and has done little to broker peace. Hopefully Trump can take reigns and save the this planet from the mess Biden is leaving it in