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

a reply to: Xtrozero

Okay, it seems to be confirmed now.

But everyone here jumping to believe everything they hear immediately is embarrassing.

Let's use some discernment.

a reply to: watchitburn

Everyone?

Some of us questioned it.

a reply to: putnam6


Ummm...it was only 1...(one)...intermediate ballistic missile with a M.I.R.V. warhead...Multiple...Independent targetable...reentry...vehicles...at mach 10...

All of those strikes were from the same missile...bear in mind...each and all of those strikes can be nuclear or conventionally equipped...and targetable to different cities/installations...

What you saw was merely the M.I.R.V vehicles...without...any warheads...

It was a demonstration of intent...and a warning...

The US and the entirety of NATO doesn't have anything in it's inventory to intercept these vehicles with...

Perhaps it's time for the zealots in charge of the MIC and the current western governments to take a step back and consider the warning for what it was...


But I doubt it...they're too...invested...

Duck and cover...





YouSir

a reply to: YouSir

I don't think they can be "conventionally equipped".

And there is THAAD".

And of course, there is M.A.D.

originally posted by: YouSir

Ummm...it was only 1...(one)...intermediate ballistic missile with a M.I.R.V. warhead...Multiple...Independent targetable...reentry...vehicles...at mach 10...

I can't find anything suggesting it was MIRV and was medium-range. They did say it was hypersonic, but that is something they say a lot when talking about their missiles whether true or not.

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: YouSir

I don't think they can be "conventionally equipped".

And there is THAAD".

And of course, there is M.A.D.

Ummm...they can put any thing on the end of the M.I.R.V's they wish to...they could load them with tungsten kinetic warheads...they could load them with any combination of explosive warheads they want...they can also load them with nuclear warheads...

MAD...no longer applies...

THAAD...is untested against anything but dummy targets...and is only a kinetic kill vehicle...trying to hit a series of M.I.R.V.'s
raining down at mach 10 is just not going to happen...


You don't seem to get the picture that this test shot is illustrating...



YouSir

Intermediate-range ballistic missiles have a range of 3,000–5,500 km (1,860-3,415 miles) "Whether it was an ICBM or an IRBM, the range isn't the important factor," said Fabian Hoffmann, a doctoral research fellow at Oslo university who specializes in missile technology and nuclear strategy. "The fact that it carried a MIRVed (Multiple independently targetable reentry vehicle) payload is much more significant for signaling purposes and is the reason Russia opted for it. This payload is exclusively associated with nuclear-capable missiles."

Link

In 2021 there was a huge build up. Everyone said not to worry. They invaded. They want to occupy not destroy. This is why you are seeing the warfare you are.

For them to launch this, they are warning that they have the capability. This is a warning and it should be heeded.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: YouSir

Ummm...it was only 1...(one)...intermediate ballistic missile with a M.I.R.V. warhead...Multiple...Independent targetable...reentry...vehicles...at mach 10...

I can't find anything suggesting it was MIRV and was medium-range. They did say it was hypersonic, but that is something they say a lot when talking about their missiles whether true or not.

Ummm...you really need to broaden your horizons...


YouSir

From what I hear Russia only has a handful of these missiles so I doubt that there will be many demonstrations.

a reply to: YouSir

They could load them with magic fairy pixie dust, too.

How does M.A.D. no longer apply?

You do realise, that the UK, France and the US also has scary stuff?

Do you think we should just bend over and give in?

originally posted by: Ravenwatcher
From what I hear Russia only has a handful of these missiles so I doubt that there will be many demonstrations.

Ummm...I also...ahem...hear...that Russia long ago ran out of missiles and bullets...and is forced to only use...shovels...

That's what I hear...

I also...heard...just yesterday...that Kindergarten teachers are now taking out cruise missiles...with manpads...

Good to...hear...



YouSir

a reply to: YouSir

I also hear that because Russia used a medium range ballistic missile we should all cower in fear and accept Putin as our new Overlord.

I haven't read all the replies here (yet), but just wanted to throw this out there...

First, moving ICBMs into Ukraine is insane and a sure fire way to trigger WW3. Biden, or whomever is behind this, needs to be locked up.

Second, and perhaps good news; you don't move an ICBM anywhere in a matter of a couple months (which is all the time the Biden administration has left). Certainly not silo-based ICBMs anyway. This takes 6-8 months to accomplish even on a very accelerated time line. Theater type weapons on mobile launchers, maybe, but not ICBMs. So, this could just be the media fear mongering, and one would hope cooler minds will prevail with Trump. Remember, Trump is the antithesis of a warhawk.

edit - Medium range theater nukes are a much larger threat in all of this.

a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Who is even suggesting moving ICBMs into Ukraine?

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: YouSir

They could load them with magic fairy pixie dust, too.

How does M.A.D. no longer apply?

You do realise, that the UK, France and the US also has scary stuff?

Do you think we should just bend over and give in?

Ummm...yes...just bend over...please...

The UK is a failed state...swimming in debt...with a military that couldn't fill a rather smallish stadium...

If your former PM...hadn't stuck his uncombable head into the mix...this would have been over by May of 2022...

The regions of Donetsk...Lugansk...Kherson...and Zaporizhia...would still be part of Ukraine...


So spare me the rhetoric...

Keep puffing out your chest...I'm sure that'll scare the Russians...face it...your a warmonger...pushing for more war...more dead Ukrainians...

NATO is the proverbial boy with his finger stuck in the dike...

Keep pushing for more war...and you just might get your wish...



YouSir

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: Flyingclaydisk

Who is even suggesting moving ICBMs into Ukraine?

Did you read the OP?

He changed the Nuclear Doctrine a couple of days ago, gearing up to cover his arse.

Russian President Vladimir Putin on Tuesday approved an updated nuclear doctrine that spells out the circumstances that allow him to use Moscow’s atomic arsenal, the world’s largest. The development comes amid heightened concerns over Western involvement in the Ukraine conflict, with Kremlin officials citing the four-year-old document as a necessary response to recent US military aid for Ukraine. The new version of the document, titled “Basic Principles of State Policy on Nuclear Deterrence, lowers the threshold for a nuclear strike in response to a broader range of convention attacks on Russia when backed by a nuclear-armed ally.

Here’s all you need to know about the Russian nuclear doctrine. Russia’s nuclear doctrine Putin signed its first iteration in 2020, and he approved the latest version Tuesday, according to the Kremlin. The document establishes a framework for conditions under which the Kremlin leader could order a strike from the world’s biggest atomic arsenal. The previous 2020 doctrine said Russia may use nuclear weapons in case of a nuclear attack by an enemy or a conventional attack that threatens the existence of the state. However, the revamped document said any attack by a non-nuclear power supported by nuclear power would be considered a joint attack, and that any attack by one member of a military bloc would be considered an attack by the entire alliance.

www.firstpost.com...

a reply to: KrustyKrab

He won't have a home or arse if he decides to play big boy games, I'm sure he knows this.

a reply to: YouSir

Me, pushing for more war?

UK a failed State?

Our Navy could fill quite a few swimming pools.

We also have a nuclear deterrent.

At this point, I think you are just on a wind up.

Which is both sad and not really working.

originally posted by: Ravenwatcher
a reply to: KrustyKrab

He won't have a home or arse if he decides to play big boy games, I'm sure he knows this.

Ummm...neither will you...or those you admire...or those you love...or any of us...not even the western mental midgets currently running their Shiite shows...

Is what it is...



YouSir