Support for nuclear weapons

  • Thread starter Thread starter Brendan_64
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
So, there are foreign countries, such as Russia and China, that we KNOW for fact, are stealing our military secrets as fast as they can.

We are attempting to counter-intel Russian and Chinese intelligence efforts.

In addition, China is developing Mach 10 anti-aircraftcarrier missiles. And China has filled in coral mini-islands [without an environmental impact statement].

So, the United States is trying to keep up and figure out what is going on.

Nothing wrong with any of that. Normal part of intel and counter-intel.
 
Those Chinese dredged coral “expanded reefs” [the euphemism is “disputed shoal”] are in violation of international agreements.

There is no trespassing involved.

[If a typhoon comes by and washes those “disputed shoals” into the ocean, they will get “ticked off” if we don’t rescue all those PRC soldiers and sailors and techies.]
 
Last edited:
It appears that China takes offense at extremely minor items.

Apparently, a drawing showed up in an internal Chinese report that could ONLY have appeared by being stolen from an internal U.S. document.
 
A missile moving at Mach 10 is a big design challenge. That’s over 7,000 miles per hour. They could field one going Mach 5 but Mach 10 is doubtful.
 
Say the United States were to have disarmed during the Cold War, as many on the left desired.

That would have given the upper hand to the Soviet Union. An authoritarian, anti-democratic, and repressive society that was hostile to believers in God (as they encouraged state idolatry) and of freedom more generally. We often forget that we were engaged in a very real geopolitical conflict with them – the loss of which would’ve led to grave consequences for humanity.

Nuclear weapons are needed in today’s world to counter the influence of Russia and China. I know we are called to be peacemakers, and I would strongly oppose preemptive usage of a nuke. But we can’t pretend that we live in a completely harmonious world. Any concession of power by America (no matter how imperfect we’ve been) is a chance for less benevolent nations to gain influence. Of this, we must be cautious.
 
Also … after World War Two, the United States largely demobilized its military. And then we had the Berlin Blockade by Russia.

What could have happened was a resumption of major hostilities. Instead, the United States to save money by NOT remobilizing its World War Two armies, built a lot of nuclear weapons and empowered the Army to build nuclear artillery shells and the Air Force to carry “tactical” [short range] nuclear weapons and “strategic” [LONG RANGE] nuclear weapons.

And then the United States rescued the City of Berlin with the Berlin Air Lift. It was a monumental effort. And it was successful.

The Army’s mission was to blunt or stop a Russian tank invasion of western Europe. The Air Force’s mission was to carpet bomb Russia with nukes. AND TO LEAVE NO MISTAKEN IMPRESSION THAT IT WOULD SUCCEED.

Right after that, the French had a military defeat in Vietnam and then North Korea did a tank invasion of South Korea. And we knew from studying internal Russian documents that these events were linked and coordinated in and by Moscow.

And we knew from our other information sources that the Russians were experimenting with nuclear weapons and long range missiles.

FINALLY, President Reagan who had a degree in economics and who had negotiated with Communists previously, PUSHED the Russians and stressed their economy until they collapsed. Economic warfare took the place of nuclear warfare.
 
Last edited:
Generally agree, but don’t fall in love with Atomic Annie. It was a fluke, in the Army concept of tactical nuclear weapons, for in-theater use, and was obsolete about at deployment, though it looked snazzy. The Army role in nuclear overall strategy was always, and for much longer, primarily in the missile area. Corporal, Honest John, Little John, Sergeant, Lance, Lacrosse, and onward and upward, to the longer-legged Redstone and Pershing. I recall building many Revell models of such.

The AF also had a related role, in the Mace and Matador systems, up to the GLCM, interalia. Cruise missiles.
 
Where does it say that it was the job of the USA to land at Normandy beach?
 
There were eight inch and 155mm nuclear artillery shells produced during the Cold War, as well as demolition charges. So we were ready for anything.
 
And they lasted longer in the stockpile than I had thought. So, point.
 
There is DETAILED information in “Nuclear Weapons of the United States” which I purchased from China. [no really]

[via Amazon]
 
I’m still meaning to get that.

And I note there were shells for the 16" rifles on the appropriate battleships, too.
 
The atomic cannon was a credible deterrent. Otherwise, it would never have been deployed. Ever since 1945, the Russians were always a threat to the West.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top