|
Smythe posted:it would be a real bummer if japan got nuked again. a real, real bummer. 
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2018 03:52
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 00:57 |
|
|
Duscat posted:you don't HAVE nuclear deterrence against the US if all you can blow up is one, possibly foreign, city like, think about it for one second - don't you think that if there was a way around MAD, that either the US or the USSR would have done it to each other? No, they didn't! You know why? Because there's no loving shortcut around MAD you idiot. The instant there is a shortcut, you've undermined the entire premise behind MAD! what's to stop 1 million consecutive 'bloody nose' attacks? where the gently caress do you draw the line, and how can you make the other side believe it?
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2018 03:52
|
|
|
rudatron posted:YES YOU DO, you're making it expensive to attack you, more expensive than it is to not attack, therefore deterrence. and i'm saying there's no MAD when one side has a fledgling program that can maybe barely hit US soil i'm not saying it's sane or sensible to attack north korea in any way just that there's a certain amount of insane posturing and shoving we can do without them committing murder-suicide
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2018 03:55
|
|
|
A rational actor will find NY/Cali/Tokyo to be too high of a cost for the NK/SK resolution. And trust me, it wont be NK that starts the actual war. Its our own guys that will think that its totally worth it to shut up that pudgy gently caress who the hell cares about all those guys in the metro cities I dont
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2018 03:56
|
|
|
Cao Ni Ma posted:A rational actor will find NY/Cali/Tokyo to be too high of a cost for the NK/SK resolution. And trust me, it wont be NK that starts the actual war. Its our own guys that will think that its totally worth it to shut up that pudgy gently caress who the hell cares about all those guys in the metro cities I dont it has always been obvious that if nuclear war starts, it is because the US either started it or chose not to stop it
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2018 03:59
|
|
|
Duscat posted:and i'm saying there's no MAD when one side has a fledgling program that can maybe barely hit US soil this isn't a loving video game where you can put in the cheat code or abuse AI behavior or whatever - you're dealing with an opponent with the ability to think, can see the obvious implications coming a mile away, and the obvious implication of 'no retaliation' is 'you die', therefore, they must retaliate, and there's no way to prevent them doing that.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2018 03:59
|
|
|
rudatron posted:if you're okay with a bomb hitting NY, LA, and maybe a few other major cities, then by all means, talk about going for a 'bloody nose' see that's the thing that's not gonna happen they're not going to nuke LA if some military installation gets bombed, because of, guess what, MAD
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2018 04:00
|
|
|
they'll respond at least proportionally, so expect okinawa or guam to get nuked
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2018 04:02
|
|
|
rudatron posted:they'll respond at least proportionally, so expect okinawa or guam to get nuked the US isn't going to nuke them
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2018 04:02
|
|
|
and if they only have one bomb, they absolutely will hit LA, because again, they're dead anyway, so you kill as many of the other side as possible
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2018 04:03
|
|
|
"MAD" and "launch every nuke right now" are not the same thing. you want the war to be too expensive for the other guy, right? that can happen without pressing every button. the NSC back when PD-59 was developed thought there would be quick flurries of nuclear strikes followed by weeks or months of no nuclear strikes as the war continued and both sides hunted around for stuff to nuke. https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu/nukevault/ebb390/
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2018 04:04
|
|
|
rudatron posted:and if they only have one bomb, they absolutely will hit LA, because again, they're dead anyway, so you kill as many of the other side as possible yes, fine, if they feel they're dead anyway, they might indeed do that
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2018 04:04
|
|
|
BrutalistMcDonalds posted:"MAD" and "launch every nuke right now" are not the same thing. you want the war to be too expensive for the other guy, right? that can happen without pressing every button. the NSC back when PD-59 was developed thought there would be quick flurries of nuclear strikes followed by weeks or months of no nuclear strikes as the war continued and both sides hunted around for stuff to nuke. imagine you're kim jong-un and the US just ran a massive air raid that destroyed all of your above-ground nuke facilities and even damaged some of the underground ones do you launch your nukes and die as MAD demands
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2018 04:16
|
|
|
rudatron posted:
yes it is
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2018 04:17
|
|
|
Duscat posted:imagine you're kim jong-un and the US just ran a massive air raid that destroyed all of your above-ground nuke facilities and even damaged some of the underground ones I'd use my diesel subs to attack American warships.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2018 04:27
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:I'd use my diesel subs to attack American warships.  triremes are cheaper and the odds are not that much worse
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2018 04:28
|
|
|
Duscat posted:
I wouldn't expect a 21st Century Tsushima or anything, but any damage done to the US Navy would wreck its aura of invincibility and be a proportional "bloody nose" that directly targets American assets without attacking South Korea.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2018 04:32
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:I wouldn't expect a 21st Century Tsushima or anything, but any damage done to the US Navy would wreck its aura of invincibility and be a proportional "bloody nose" that directly targets American assets without attacking South Korea. Didn't a French diesel sub sneak through the carrier group, sink a US carrier, and slip away during one navy excrise? I think the same happened with the Swedes .
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2018 04:56
|
|
|
OhFunny posted:Didn't a French diesel sub sneak through the carrier group, sink a US carrier, and slip away during one navy excrise? The swedes build extremely good subs
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2018 04:57
|
|
|
if i were kim jong un i wouldn't do anything. make america look like the villains while i'd sit and bide my time and then sink a warship or dump the fire and fury across the DMZ when the world leasts expects it. oh yes haha
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2018 04:58
|
|
|
being Kim jong un seems pretty sweet. yeah you just wait for trump to do something stupid and if that gets boring do something crazy yourself to spice things up. pretty much no situation where you don’t have a winning move.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2018 05:03
|
|
|
I do seriously wonder about American surface and near-surface capabilities. Sure, they can blow stuff up from the air, but I really doubt the American navy could stand up as well to a combined sub and shore-based attack from anti-ship missiles. Not defeated, but 50k dead in Vietnam brought America to its knees, so they really can't afford losses.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2018 05:29
|
|
|
nopantsjack posted:Pls rebel against your mushhead prez, an actually pr decent country is gonna get killed..you guys have guns right? its illegal to use guns against the us government thanks to Lincoln 
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2018 05:34
|
|
|
Having servicemen get killed in a war actually has a reinforcing effect where the reactionary elements in your society become even more committed to the war effort even if they know it's a bad idea.OhFunny posted:Didn't a French diesel sub sneak through the carrier group, sink a US carrier, and slip away during one navy excrise? https://www.warhistoryonline.com/history/chinese-submarine-appeared-in-the-middle-of-a-carrier-battle-group.html
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2018 05:37
|
|
|
north korea nuking the US would be ftw. dta
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2018 15:16
|
|
|
Duscat posted:imagine you're kim jong-un and the US just ran a massive air raid that destroyed all of your above-ground nuke facilities and even damaged some of the underground ones well to be fair if america starts doing massive air raids on yiou and you don't defend yourself then you're dead anyway surely? saddam, gaddafi etc aren't exactly alive and kicking because they didn't retaliate if america can do it then they will kill KJO and kill/ruin everyone in his regime
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2018 18:36
|
|
|
like if they retaliate america isnt gonna be like "well thats them telt" its gonna keep pushing its luck otoh if they "bloody nose" NK (and everyone knows getting a bloody nose calms you right down) and NK responds with a similar limited strike that will be used as a bloody shirt with which the US can galvanise more support for more strikes and a larger engagement, this may even be the actual desired outcome from such a strike. basically war is insanely stupid unless you are a psychopathic rogue state with no chance of losing, so america (losing in the traditional war sense, i.e. being conquered, america loses every war but the other side always comes off way worse in victory. since america mainly wants to rob countries or strangle regional competitors in the crib rather than hold territory, this is because they're a psycho successor empire to the british empire who tried to do both and failed)
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2018 18:40
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:Having servicemen get killed in a war actually has a reinforcing effect where the reactionary elements in your society become even more committed to the war effort even if they know it's a bad idea.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2018 23:58
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:Having servicemen get killed in a war actually has a reinforcing effect where the reactionary elements in your society become even more committed to the war effort even if they know it's a bad idea.  im the dude in the front side-eying the camera
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2018 00:38
|
|
|
Rudaton is mostly right. Trying to destroy a countries nuclear arsenal is something that would be considered an existential threat.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2018 07:11
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/952697864991531008quote:WASHINGTON — Across the military, officers and troops are quietly preparing for a war they hope will not come.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2018 01:51
|
|
|
yeah. were going to war
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2018 03:20
|
|
|
quote:Others said the plan was strictly related to counterterrorism efforts. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2018 03:43
|
|
|
launch em
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2018 03:47
|
|
|
looks pretty inevitable at this point. i wonder if it will be delayed until 2019 or if they will just go ahead this year.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2018 04:48
|
|
|
Trump has a flair for the dramatic, so maybe they'll attack during the Olympics.
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2018 05:14
|
|
|
Pener Kropoopkin posted:Trump has a flair for the dramatic, so maybe they'll attack during the Olympics. another page out of the strong daddy putin play book
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2018 05:20
|
|
|
Trump turning a world event into a warzone is just too narratively perfect.
Pener Kropoopkin has issued a correction as of 08:18 on Jan 15, 2018 |
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2018 05:29
|
|
|
lmao at the idea that officers and troops don't want the north korea war to come
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2018 08:14
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 00:57 |
|
|
ScrubLeague posted:lmao at the idea that officers and troops don't want the north korea war to come they get to live out there nork stomping fantasies while Grandpa president is busy golfing and/or yelling at celebrities on twitter. win/win
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2018 08:30
|
|
