Is it pure cope to think that the US has some way to intercept or mitigate the risk of being nuked by an enemy nation?
I mean the US MIC has been getting more black budget R&D money than God for 80 years and these are the only existential threat to the US. I would be shocked if there wasn't some tip top secret shit the US has just in case of nukes.
>yet another nuke concern thread
very organic
Its the opposite. Russia is always saber rattling about nukes but I feel fairly confident the US has some sort of countermeasure besides politics. This is a nuke no worries zone.
go horny post 4 more slide threads since jannies have been useless for hours now
I wouldn't worry about it
>he doesn't know that starlink is brilliant pebbles
Fricking vatnik hookers foaming at the mouth lmao
LOL
How is it cope? One program is public due to being ordered by Congress and has been publicly tested and the other, Aegis, is everywhere, on destroyers and on land in Europe and Asia, and has shot down an ICBM before.
It can obviously be saturated and fail, but it also obviously works up to a certain number of missiles, we just don't know what that number is.
Can we stop a nuke? Probably. Can we stop all their nukes? Nope. That's the problem you face with nukes, they're strategic. If it ever came to nuclear war nobody would be launching only one nuke which is why the only response is to launch all of yours in response.
If we can't survive it, neither can you. Mutually assured destruction.
Since Patriots have been proven to take out Russian hypersonics I think we are safe.
>Since Patriots have been proven to take out Russian hypersonics I think we are safe.
by fricking who?
Ukraine proved how awful they are
It's more about what happens next.
THE ROCKETS ARE RAISING. THE COSMONAUTS ARE HATCHING. THE ASSES ARE IN ASS ORBIT.
The US is one of the most nuke resilient countries due to sheer topography and population dispersal so long as coastal migration doesn't reverse it. The reality is you kill a few million US civilians OR hit US nuclear silos OR hit US bases, there's no practical way to do them all at once and no nuclear stockpile big enough to do it all anyway. Russia has credible deterrent with Siberia, but it is also a country with half of the total population bunched up in an area smaller than California.
Look up Project Bioshield & the moderately related National Stockpile, the goal is like a half hour response time.
As far as speculative ICBM interception projects, a number of air based solutions have been floated and may very well be deployed. F-35s with a special package were tested in 2014 apparently successfully and this was the whole point of strapping a frickhuge laser on the front of business liners with easily concealed nose-cones.
Considering that it takes roughly $10 million to maintain one warhead for one year, and Russia has 5,889 warheads on a budget $84 billion, its fair to say that 90% of Russia's nukes don't work, if any work at all. Also consider that at least half of this budget is squandered through corruption.
Pic rel is where Russia stored its nukes in Belgorod, which raises significant concerns that no-one can really know.
First thought was "It probably didn't look like that then" but reality set in with "It was probably worse".