|
Plainly false. Saudi Arabia was more or less disinterested in nukes until it became obvious that nobody's going to do anything about Iran getting one. Nobody is afraid of an Israeli nuclear first strike. Israel doesn't give a poo poo about anything beyond its borders and never has, so long as the Straits of Tiran remain open and nobody's shooting at them. And none of the Arabs care about the Palestinians either. Everyone except Turkey and Qatar was on board with Protective Edge this past summer, especially Egypt. Iran wants a bomb because it gives it a leg up in the region against its actual rivals, which are Turkey and Saudi Arabia, and to protect its regime from external interference. e: besides which, most of the Middle East countries find Israel to be very convenient. The people in those countries hate Israel, but they have little to no say in what their governments actually do. Mortabis fucked around with this message at 18:00 on Oct 10, 2014 |
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 17:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 06:20 |
|
|
evil_bunnY posted:Yeah there's a good loving reason nobody fucks with NK, and it's not their state of the art armed forces. That has more to do with the fact with they're protected by China, and no one wants to invade China to get to NK.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 18:00
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:
Pretty sure Iran could figure out a way to strap it under an F-4 or F-14. That's good enough to gently caress up the Strait.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 18:02
|
|
|
Mortabis posted:Israel doesn't give a poo poo about anything beyond its borders and never has, so long as the Straits of Tiran remain open and nobody's shooting at them. This patently false statement is such a hilarious can of worms.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 18:29
|
|
|
Vindolanda posted:France's idea of NATO compliance is giving Exocets to south american maniacs. If there is (which is unlikely) a regulation about putting things in English, they'd probably ignore it. ADLA pilot briefings are actually in English because of NATO. If the mission also involve non pilots (like the fuscoms) the pilots get their briefing in English, and the other personnel in French.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 18:31
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:This patently false statement is such a hilarious can of worms. What are you saying? Are you saying that Israel would fly attack aircraft without permission over the airspace of a neighbor to strike, say, a nuclear plant in another country? Preposterous.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 18:42
|
|
|
.
Hexyflexy fucked around with this message at 04:25 on Jan 11, 2020 |
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 18:55
|
|
|
I'm feeling lucky
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 19:02
|
|
|
Apparently the Air Force is in some hot water over wasting 500 million on buying and refurbishing C-27Js for the Afghan air force. And then turning them into 32 grand worth of scrap.quote:A U.S. government watchdog agency is asking the Air Force to explain why it decided to destroy 16 aircraft initially bought for the Afgan air force and turn them into $32,000 of scrap metal instead of finding other ways to salvage nearly $500 million in U.S. funds spent on the program.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 19:41
|
|
|
Back Hack posted:That has more to do with the fact with they're protected by China, and no one wants to invade China to get to NK. And they're protected by China because China doesn't want a massive humanitarian crisis popping up right on their border.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 20:07
|
|
|
VikingSkull posted:I kinda got the vibe a few years ago that Iran was actively pursuing a bomb, but I think the continued assassination of their scientists and Stuxnet have cooled that off somewhat. Throw the threat from ISIS in and they seem more willing to play ball lately. The whole IS/ISIL/ISIS/DAESH/whatever the gently caress we're calling it this week crisis has actually given the Iranians opportunity to expand their nuclear program. Iranian diplomats are tying US-Iranian cooperation on ISIS to US concessions on enrichment. http://theweek.com/speedreads/index/266790/speedreads-iran-offers-to-help-defeat-isis--if-the-us-lifts-nuclear-sanctions
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 20:11
|
|
|
Party Plane Jones posted:Apparently the Air Force is in some hot water over wasting 500 million on buying and refurbishing C-27Js for the Afghan air force. And then turning them into 32 grand worth of scrap. The answer to this is: "it's such a small amount of money compared to what we usually waste, so we didn't think about it" right? (I'm sure Canada was considering buying those but literally took too long to decide if they actually wanted them or not.)  As for Iran - I think they want nuclear power, but with a civil nuclear power industry comes good latency to build a bomb, (like Japan has) should they need it. It should be said that the treaty that controls nuclear weapons has a very specific clause defending the rights of nations to pursue nuclear power for peaceful purposes, including the enrichment of uranium to 20%. The Iranians have been following that treaty, as multiple UN inspection teams have confirmed. What's really happening here is that Israel does not want Iran to have this nuclear latency, since it provided a theoretical check on Israel's ability to do whatever the gently caress it wants. Thus, Israel and the USA have been doing everything they can to derail Iran's civil program. Really, even in the worst case scenario, (Iran has the bomb and missiles to deliver it) the results are not that bad for Israel - you get a cold war in the Mideast. That really just puts a check on Israel's power there - if you believe the Mexican standoff logic of the 'big' Cold War, nothing else happens. So really the whole thing is America and Israel vs. Iran, to see if the first group can strong-arm the second. The threat is actually minimal, but is being played up by those groups who have something they want at stake, in the same way Russia painted Assad as a hero standing up to rebels (because he still supported the Russian naval base on the Mediterranean.) I suspect the whole thing plays well for the Iranians domestically; suddenly a legal program for peaceful purposes is being attacked by the Great Satans via intelligence shenanigans, just confirming what Iranian leaders have always been saying about them. You could also say that Iran could get all sorts of poo poo out of abandoning the program through negotiation - namely its economy returning to the world at large, another big win for Iran.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 20:18
|
|
|
Bacarruda posted:The whole IS/ISIL/ISIS/DAESH/whatever the gently caress we're calling it this week crisis has actually given the Iranians opportunity to expand their nuclear program. Iranian diplomats are tying US-Iranian cooperation on ISIS to US concessions on enrichment. We already did them (Iran) a favor, by hitting Khorason, which was a bigger threat to the Iranian government than it ever was to Western interests.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 20:32
|
|
|
Mortabis posted:Israel doesn't give a poo poo about anything beyond its borders and never has, so long as the Straits of Tiran remain open and nobody's shooting at them. Do you mean the God-defined borders of Israel, which encompasses the lands between the Nile and the Euphrates?
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 20:59
|
|
|
joat mon posted:Do you mean the God-defined borders of Israel, which encompasses the lands between the Nile and the Euphrates? Is that actually in the contract God made with Jacob or is that something Christians tacked onto the new Testament?
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 21:05
|
|
|
Hexyflexy posted:I totally agree, at this point building a reasonable thermonuclear bomb is basically about whether you can get fuel, and how much cash you can drop on the project. We were doing thermo nukes in the 60s, but thankfully it's still a pain in the arse to generate fuel, well, and bits of neutron generators. Thermonuclear is more complicated than simple fission and there is no reason to believe anyone outside the Big Five + Israel have the capability to build a fusion bomb at this point. It's somewhat moot unless you really need huge yield and outside World War III mountain-melting scenarios huge yields aren't really necessary. Nebakenezzer posted:The answer to this is: "it's such a small amount of money compared to what we usually waste, so we didn't think about it" right? You don't enrich anywhere near 20% for civilian power purposes, nor do you need quite a bit of the other associated stuff mentioned before that has no other non-bomb purpose. There is a lot less overlap between nuclear power generation and nuclear weaponry (materials/tech/expertise and so on) than people realize. For that matter they've been repeatedly offered the deal of just having secured civilian fuel (and medical isotopes etc) given to them, which is the standard non-proliferation-compliant option other nations with civilian nuke power have chosen. It has been rejected out of hand. Multiple inspection teams have confirmed they haven't been able to see nearly what they think they need to, including a facility that mysteriously just exploded. I disagree with pretty much everything else in your post but whatev this ain't the place
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 23:42
|
|
|
Snowdens Secret posted:I disagree with pretty much everything else in your post but whatev this ain't the place I agree (that this is not the place) so - what's the deal with 20% enrichment being allowed under the NNPT, then? I know civilian reactors usually make do with much less enrichment. Is this cap for research purposes, or something?
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2014 23:50
|
|
|
Nebakenezzer posted:Is that actually in the contract God made with Jacob or is that something Christians tacked onto the new Testament? God to Moses, at Exodus 23:31 posted:I will establish your borders from the Red Sea to the Mediterranean Sea, and from the desert to the Euphrates River. I will give into your hands the people who live in the land, and you will drive them out before you.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 00:50
|
|
|
Snowdens Secret posted:Thermonuclear is more complicated than simple fission and there is no reason to believe anyone outside the Big Five + Israel have the capability to build a fusion bomb at this point. It's somewhat moot unless you really need huge yield and outside World War III mountain-melting scenarios huge yields aren't really necessary. I get your point, but thing is, stuff has changed ( unless you're trying to make the biggest bang in the smallest space so your MIRVs work, which, well you know your stuff, is loving expensive ). Biggest fucker for thermonuclear stuff is the equations of state of plutonium ( and all the reflection casing and the ablation implosion, but if your country has a few physics geniuses, you'll figure that poo poo out, India did, Pakistan did and sold it everywhere ). Till recently that poo poo was classified up to hell, and if you even look at the public specs on it, it's hilarious. Imagine a metal that, while motherfucking toxic and radioactive, you've worked out a critical radius and start to machine your pit. You heat it up a bit too much. Crystalline structure changes ( I think it has five! ) and it shrinks below critical radius. Bye bye.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 00:58
|
|
|
Hexyflexy posted:I get your point, but thing is, stuff has changed ( unless you're trying to make the biggest bang in the smallest space so your MIRVs work, which, well you know your stuff, is loving expensive ). don't forget it's pyrophoric, and will ignite in oxygen environments if heated/ground to a fine dust! Then again, the Manhattan Project still succeeded despite some crazy incidents itself.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 01:31
|
|
|
Party Plane Jones posted:Apparently the Air Force is in some hot water over wasting 500 million on buying and refurbishing C-27Js for the Afghan air force. And then turning them into 32 grand worth of scrap. Does anyone have a TLDR on why nothing involving the C-27J and the United States makes any goddamn sense?
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 02:51
|
|
|
The LA Ground Speed story as told by the guy that did it. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7EhdaPo5W8 God he tells it better than it reads.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 04:28
|
|
|
Watching some of the footage of the Indonesian military celebration this month I gotta say. The Su-27 is one sweet looking aircraft, how are Australian F-35's going to stack up against them (assuming they can get airborne without exploding)?
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 04:55
|
|
|
Execu-speak posted:Watching some of the footage of the Indonesian military celebration this month I gotta say. The Su-27 is one sweet looking aircraft, how are Australian F-35's going to stack up against them (assuming they can get airborne without exploding)? Lets ask Dr Carlo Kopp Haha holy poo poo, I just felt an itty bitty baby tumor form from saying that
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 05:05
|
|
|
jaegerx posted:The LA Ground Speed story as told by the guy that did it. I will never, EVER, get tired of that story.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 06:00
|
|
|
Execu-speak posted:Watching some of the footage of the Indonesian military celebration this month I gotta say. The Su-27 is one sweet looking aircraft, how are Australian F-35's going to stack up against them (assuming they can get airborne without exploding)? It won't come to that because of this: http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/article/20140811/NEWS08/308110050/U-S-Australia-sign-25-year-deal-Marines-Darwin And this: http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-news/us-eyes-perth-naval-base-20120801-23fy9.html
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 06:36
|
|
|
Hexyflexy posted:I get your point, but thing is, stuff has changed ( unless you're trying to make the biggest bang in the smallest space so your MIRVs work, which, well you know your stuff, is loving expensive ). Pakistan does not have thermonuclear weapons, nor are there indications it has designs or capability for them. Successful fusion detonation remains difficult, particularly if you can't or won't test like the current fusion-capable nations did. See: http://thediplomat.com/2014/06/is-india-building-thermonuclear-weapons/ Nebakenezzer posted:I agree (that this is not the place) so - what's the deal with 20% enrichment being allowed under the NNPT, then? I know civilian reactors usually make do with much less enrichment. Is this cap for research purposes, or something? Research purposes and the quantities involved in said are very small jaegerx posted:The LA Ground Speed story as told by the guy that did it. The Navy version involves a CVBG whose oiler broke and all the ships are calling out their remaining days (or hours) of fuel burn at x bell, when the battlegroup Sturgeon at PD decides to be a smartass
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 07:00
|
|
|
Iraqi Aeromachines    Here's one before it got the Iraqi paint scheme  Daesh keeps shooting down innocent Iraqi army mi-35s and Bell 407s. It's my humble opinion that Saudi shouldn't have given them so many manpads.   Iraqi Mi-28, I'm not sure if any have been shot down   What's this? A jet airplane with an Iraqi flag?? Are we going to allow this???? ( A little bit old news but I didn't see any pictures posted)  The greaziest su-25 rolling out.  Jet Rangers Now that they have a few aircraft, all the Iraqi military needs is an officer corps that isn't completely corrupt and incompetent, a constitution that isn't meant to lead to the eventual dissolution of the state, and some rain. Hopefully they can stop this ISIS advance and buy some time to get a few more soldiers trained and some logistics set up.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 11:50
|
|
|
I keep forgetting how gigantic and especially tall the Hind is
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 12:29
|
|
|
Snowdens Secret posted:Pakistan does not have thermonuclear weapons, nor are there indications it has designs or capability for them. Successful fusion detonation remains difficult, particularly if you can't or won't test like the current fusion-capable nations did. See: http://thediplomat.com/2014/06/is-india-building-thermonuclear-weapons/ You're right, and thanks for correcting me. I'll leave one little thermonuclear story I find funny as hell. This book is really cool and Kip Thorne is a legitimate physics genius. When he was studying radiation pressure in collapsing stars when he was a post grad, he was finding it hard to work out whether plasma would be stable against X-ray pressure. At the time there was some cooperation between the U.S. and the Soviet Union, and physicists would regularly visit in both directions. He asked a Russian on one trip if he knew if it was a stable. He blanked him and just said, 'yep, you're a friend but I'm not talking about it though'. He went back to the U.S. confused as gently caress, and asked an American professor, who did the exact same thing. It only occurred to him later how they knew.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 13:37
|
|
|
jaegerx posted:The LA Ground Speed story as told by the guy that did it. This was glorious. I've been reading and watching videos about the SR-71 in the past week and what an amazing aircraft it is. I mean I would say without any hesitation that it is the greatest achievement in aviation, ever. When I first read the sentence "the standard procedure in case of a hostile missile launch was simply to accelerate and outfly the missile" I had literally this face on:  An interesting question: could the SR-71 be modified to carry nuclear weapons for example? I mean that would terrify the gently caress out of everyone. You can see it, but there's nothing you can do to bring it down. You just follow it until it overflies you and drops a loving nuke on your head.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 13:55
|
|
|
OhYeah posted:An interesting question: could the SR-71 be modified to carry nuclear weapons for example? I mean that would terrify the gently caress out of everyone. You can see it, but there's nothing you can do to bring it down. You just follow it until it overflies you and drops a loving nuke on your head. ICBMs made that kinda thing redundant. There's no point, you can see those coming, but at Mach 10, good luck stopping the warheads. You kinda can, if you accept nuking the gently caress out of yourself to do it, which is why the USA gave up on it, waste of cash. Sprint is still the coolest loving missile ever though.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 14:09
|
|
|
Hexyflexy posted:ICBMs made that kinda thing redundant. There's no point, you can see those coming, but at Mach 10, good luck stopping the warheads. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Y1ya-yF35g I'll just leave that here for you guys.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 14:31
|
|
|
I like Oliver, but that segment was pretty dumb.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 14:38
|
|
|
Baloogan posted:I like Oliver, but that segment was pretty dumb. In what sense? I think the cases that he cited were pretty dumb. Perhaps you meant this?
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 14:42
|
|
|
OhYeah posted:An interesting question: could the SR-71 be modified to carry nuclear weapons for example? I mean that would terrify the gently caress out of everyone. You can see it, but there's nothing you can do to bring it down. You just follow it until it overflies you and drops a loving nuke on your head. From a Ben Rich paper, The Strategic Aspect of Supercruising Flight:   No idea how serious the idea was but it's super cool.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 17:18
|
|
|
xthetenth posted:From a Ben Rich paper, The Strategic Aspect of Supercruising Flight: If the Soviet Union thought that the Black Bird could be carrying a nuclear payload they might have taken the reconnaissance flights a little differently
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 17:37
|
|
|
Mach 3+ stores separation testing would have been something to see.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 17:38
|
|
|
OhYeah posted:In what sense? I think the cases that he cited were pretty dumb. Perhaps you meant this?
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 17:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 06:20 |
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:Mach 3+ stores separation testing would have been something to see. They did do high speed separation testing for the D-21 drone. They collided and the copilot drowned after the crew landed in the ocean.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2014 18:17
|
|
