Obviously it is NOT in the favor of the US government to advertise to China and Russia that we can easily stop a full-scale nuclear attack, so they don't. I bet they can though. Why? We all know about "Space Force", we know the government has spent billions, if not trillions, on weird defense shit, some with gay names like "Space Force", but I don't think we were ever really given much info regarding the purpose of those programs or where the money went. Why? Because a lot of it is spent on nuclear defense, and it's confidential.
How do ICBMs (intercontinental ballistic missiles) work? Russia blasts one up into space or our upper atmosphere, it hangs out in orbit until it's above the US and then it rapidly nose dives until it's within range of the target.
What I think the US has are weaponized satellites constantly orbiting above our country. Realistically all we'd have to do is fire a bullet at the core of the ICBM while it's hanging out in orbit, that's all it would take. The bullet, or missile, or whatever is shot from the satellite would hardly have any drag at all, because it'd be in space or our upper atmosphere. This means that it can maintain insane speeds for a quite a long time, essentially traveling at or near muzzle velocity for pretty much its entire flight. It could EASILY blast through the metal exterior of a nuke or missile and destroy/detonate it, even if it was shot from thousands or tens of thousands of miles away (perhaps even further).
What do you guys think of this theory? Could I be onto something here?
Can the US defend against a large-scale nuclear attack? I say yes
I don't know how many times you need to be told this, but nukes aren't real.
no
this is op
Yes I'm sure they built this massive nuclear crater cover out of 2 foot thick concrete for no reason
>he knows
Ty for cheering up my day
what if a 100MT Poseidon torpedo sails up the potomak?
Bro we have UFOs
It's fine
30 minutes for a russian nuke to hit the US.
how long would it be before the US realised russia launched a nuke at them? 10 minutes?
How long would it take biden to get the call , get up and authenticate the nuke codes?
>it's 2 am, secret service storms his room
>the old coot is in bed, wakes up with news of incoming nuke, stumbles out of bed.... "yea yea im coming" has to go for peepee.
>shuffles into oval office in slippers. "alright alright, yea..yea.. im coming"....
>gets to desk "what happened again...
i have a book from 1977 with all of the studies done on nuclear weapons up to that point and it states over and over and over again that 24 inches of concrete is basically no protection at all against nuclear particles... so what is the importance of 2 feet of concrete in your mind? couldn't it just be protection against conventional weapons
I don't fucking understand you people. There's millions of witnesses and evidence of mass destruction caused by nuclear weapons. BUT THERE'S STILL GONNA BE A CONSPIRACIST NUT CASE CLAIMING THAT SOMETHING IS FAKE/FABRICATED.
Concrete provides protection against radiation, are you a fucking idiot? And regardless that isn't even the point, the primary reason they did this is to prevent radioactive particles of earth (sand, dirt, stones, etc) from being spread around. They fill the crater with the bits of radioactive earth, cover it with concrete and then it's atleast somewhat contained for a very, very long time (however long the concrete lasts).
Do you know what a MIRV is? It's a delivery vehicle for nuclear missiles. It goes up in orbit then shits out its ICBMs. These missiles retain their momentum and engage their propulsion system. They come down so fast nothing can intercept them. Lots of countries have them.
Oh great. Then we'd have the plutonium from 6,000 warheads scattered all over the place. GAME OVER
no nation on Earth can defend against a large scale nuclear attack
I imagine the president doesn't need to approve anything if they are just destroying a fucking nuclear missile that is in orbit above the US and about to drop
if you blow up a nuclear missile above a country, it still does damage. its just not as concentrated.
In the 80s, a sub launched nuke could hit its target in six minutes. Probably is half that time now. If we're at war, of course those subs would be hunted and destroyed before getting into position but during peacetime there's not much you can do about a sneak attack started by subs.
This. Also this implies none exist on American soil.
How many times the US Government has accidentally blown up nukes is terrifying, but none of this is terrifying as microchips in our brain and CRISPR/human indignities of genetic manipulation in the name of scientific advancement on the horizon. When we go, we go. I had a good run and immediate death isn’t a bad way to go. Loved you all.
>Can the US defend against a large-scale nuclear attack? I say yes.
You're a fucking retard.
>Because a lot of it is spent on nuclear defense, and it's confidential.
The tests are public and they all fail.
Then it becomes a dirty bomb instead of a nuclear explosion. Orders of magnitude difference. That said, we're not intercepting nuclear warheads in any appreciable amount.
>t. Glownigger shutting down important discussion with a variant of the flat girth poison
Also this. ICBM are how the plebs see nuclear warfare.
I swear people try to make this board both as racist and as dumb conspiracy theory as possible to thwart genuine discussions about technology and the implications.
There are few avenues left for this discussion or knowledge. Even colleges are just IdPol and limited in discussion.
If only earth wasn't flat...
Russian* nukes aren't real
fpbp
no one knows where subs are in the sea, except for the force they belong to.