>Russia claims this thing is impossible to intercept
>Claims it can single handedly destroy the entire world
legit or full of shit PrepHole?
Satan II
>Russia claims this thing is impossible to intercept
>Claims it can single handedly destroy the entire world
legit or full of shit PrepHole?
Have they had a successful test launch of it, yet?
yes, and no you can't see it
Iwas test launched 2 times with failure rate of 50% (accoriding to russian mod) As we can see its super reliable weapon, u dont even need to launch it into space because its capable of destroying world without taking off the ground
i think this one is a dud
>It says "secondary target Chipsky North"
goddammit I was gonna post that
>i think it's damp
>claims to be the world saving trad christian nation
>names their weapons after fucking satan
What did they mean by this?
I'm not sure in this case but aren't the English names usually NATO designations?
yeap, russian name is something like Sarmat but i dont know what it means.
It has something to do with reptile scales i think. I don't know if reptilians are much better than Satan though.
Sarmatia. Reference to Scythians in the west. They talked about trying to genetically bring them back.
>Eugenics program to bring back ur-borat ubermensch
>Bc theyre extinct
For hwat purpose
>we wuz steppe warriors an sheit
Just another Russian alternative history project
Maybe the monkey men were too uncontrollable, so they're trying to bring back hordes of ancient steppe nomads instead?
It's the Russian version of the word Sarmatian.
What happened to these people?
Polish nobles used to claim them as their ancestors.
means satan
The Russians call it Sarmat, Satan II is a western media name. NATO doesn't even call them Satan II.
I fucking hate the media
>Russia claims-
Bullshit, all of it. Don't even have to know what "it" is. If a russian tells you "good morning" you can bet it's midnight.
> If a russian tells you "good morning" you can bet it's midnight.
Anon i think that's just due to timezones
For some reason my brain interpreted this out of context from
's reply as some vague reference to midnight on the doomsday clock. Thought I'd share that.
will satan III blow up the entire solar system?
>He's not hindered by US missile defense
>He's not afraid of sanctions
>Sarmat has only one dream
>To disturb the NATO ambitions
>From Mother Russia
>Sarmatushki look into the distance
>At the United States
Russia made a song how great the Satan is.
lol, made me think of this:
What an ill people. You'd expect something like this from a war-torn African nation.
Lmao, North korea tier propaganda with russian characteristics
>peaceniks still simp for these people
Absolutely absurd, seldom has a people made a better case for its own annihilation.
Nations with weapons systems that are truly first-rate, unparalleled game-changers generally try to avoid the limelight. Nothing to see here; rumors that we downplayed the actual specs are just paranoid. Nothing you need to worry about, we're definitely not claiming it's some wonderwaffle.
Russia coming up with a propaganda theme song for a missile is like the hellhole autocracy of the Norks calling itself a "Democratic People's Republic": it just gives the game away. If it was really that great, why would they feel any need to try so hard?
>why would they feel any need to try so hard?
I have a feeling that this is internal propaganda so people doesn't think that they live in proud and dangerous country. After all, it's only available in Russian.
>Nations with weapons systems that are truly first-rate, unparalleled game-changers generally try to avoid the limelight. Nothing to see here; rumors that we downplayed the actual specs are just paranoid. Nothing you need to worry about, we're definitely not claiming it's some wonderwaffle.
Retarded counterproductive approach when it comes to deterrence. The purpose of military might is not to bait enemy into attacking you because they think you're weak, it's to discourage them from attacking you in the first place.
>Russia claims this thing is impossible to intercept
Mid-20th century ICBMs are physically impossible to intercept with modern technology. If Russia launches nukes at the US, their success rate will be 100% minus their own technical malfunctions. I know mutts are generally delusional about their military might, but that's not even a question of military might, it's a question of laws of physics. Maybe they have sekrit alien lasers, Idk, but with real-world technologies ICBMs are not interceptable.
>Claims it can single handedly destroy the entire world
Nukes destroying the world is a meme. Nuclear winter is a pro-Soviet propaganda lie. If the US and Russia dump their entire nuclear arsenals at each other, places like South America and Australia would barely notice it, disruptions of global economies aside.
It's a giant ass rocket flying for thousands of kilometres, you really think the USA has zero chance of intercepting one?
The main thing here is that you can fit multiple warheads on a single rocket, and separate them halfway through the ballistic flight, and the defender will need a whole rocket to intercept each one. This gives the attacker such a massive economic advantage that defence is basically hopeless, even if your anti-missile missiles had a 100% success rate. You'd need to outnumber the enemy's launch capacity something like 15 to one, and that's assuming that they're abiding by the treaties that limit the permissible number of MIRV warheads you can cluster together.
The US could MAYBE hope to counter a nuclear attack by North Korea. Anyone else, they're fucked.
>you can fit multiple warheads on a single rocket, and
You sure can! Wanna guess what's on top of all the Minuteman IIIs the US deploys?
>some kind of interceptor that could reliably independently track and hit these things
Lol my dude thinks it is 1962 out here, we track 40000 satellites and 100000 plane flights per day in real time
>ICBM technology relies on very fast MIRVs
But not ABMs it is TOO COMPLICATED FOR THEM Ahahahaha
>2% reliability rate for 1 RV.
It's 99.95% vs every single ICBM deployed today you are a goddam clown
>Mid-20th century ICBMs are physically impossible to intercept with modern technology
They're physically possible to intercept with Mid-20th century missiles Slideshow Bob, ABMs have been on the ground since 19fucking73.
>honk honk
But no really, where did you get this pile of shit fantasy opinions, do you, like actually take Armchair Copelord seriously, or is there some other fount of retardation we should know about for the lols?
ICBMs are not interceptable at reentry. Thats why USA is trying to get the missiles to intercept them in poland etc, closer to russia. they can be intercepted in their launch phase, but on rentry its too late, they are too fast.
>ICBMs are not interceptable at reentry.
this is wildly untrue. You can intercept them at any phase. where did you learn this supposed fact?
the outgoing missiles bounce off the filament that's why
How does the speed change during reentry?
Bonuspoints: At what speeds would a RV hit the ground?
They're only going Mach 28 to Mach 30 you fucking retard.
>his country's missiles couldn't do 100g decades ago with ancient tech
So sorry you aren't American.
Hey genius, the US doesnt have sprint missiles. They never got past the testing stage. They also “intercepted” an incoming warhead by detonating their own nuclear warhead to catch it in the blast.
Ironically enough, russia has these nuclear armed interceptors and the USA doesnt
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/A-135_anti-ballistic_missile_system
typical Russian thinking.
>US of A has abandoned super rocket
>WE will make super rocket
>US of A has made better system without super rocket
>WE still make super rocket
like that kid who stays on the field and declares himself winner of the kickball game because he scored home runs after everyone else left to get get ice cream
>IT IS IMPOSSIBLE BY LE PHYSICS TO INTERCEPT REENTRY VEHICLES!!!!
>ALSO LE BASED RUSSIA CAN TOTALLY INTERCEPT REENTRY VEHICLES!!!!!!!!!
The duality of the zigger mind.
>disingenous shillposter screeches when he gets exposed
Kinectic interception is impossible, counter nuking your own sky is obviously one avenue that comes with its own disadvantages
Its a shame because Sprint actually had successful intercepts using this concept. ah well, i guess it didnt make enough money for everyone if they had something that actually worked. Now the US has a 50% single missile interception rate while using rigged tests. So sad.
why do keep screeching about rigged tests. If they have a 50% intercept rate, as you claim, why even rig the tests?
To even get to the 50% interception rate and prove your multi billion dollar boondoggle is working and keep making everyone money.
>no argument
>resort to schizo babble
read your own reply and ask if that makes sense what you just said
What about that post was “schizo babble”?
Have you never heard the word boondoggle before? Esl?
thanks for proving you are ill in the head because
>uuuhhhhh they faking it because multi billion dollar boondoggle and everything is a scam and they just keep making money I know this I swear
tells me you don't know what the fuck you are talking about, and you will believe the biggest nonsense anyone tells you if it makes you feel smart.
Otherwise, please elaborate on this because one schizo sentence is not proving anything.
>still pushing the same desperate lie
>still projecting
Yep, it's a zigger. Dear god do I hope the US launches massive strikes against Russia. Eliminate all their power plants, factories, and fossil fuel production and then just let them stew.
You keep typing your fanfiction buddy. Whatever helps.
Mmm, the scent of fear and doublethinking around it. Thanks for illustrating how worthless Russia's nuclear threats are.
that is a potemkins system made to give an illusion of security
Ah of course. When russia does the thing usa was doing but better its fake. Incredible shilling
Ok keep believing in rotting concrete structures staffed by no one and with a single test from 1996.
The wikipedia page is hilarious, claiming they have such systems all around the country with hundreds of "possible" interceptors
Source: my ass
>Source: my (T)ASS
I thought it was physically impossible to intercept ICBMs on reentry. Why does Russia only have endo-atmospheric ABMs then?
Nevermind. It uses a nuclear warhead like it's the fucking 1950s still.
Correct, which is the only thing that can actually destroy an incoming warhead
Instead, the USA now has spent several billion dollars on 60 missiles that each have around 50% chance of actually hitting an ICBM in midcourse, in rigged tests
So sad.
Kinetic impact destroys far better than nuclear warheads, that's the facts. Nuclear warheads barely work against incoming MIRVs. They're a cope for primitive countries without precision guidance. Russian nukes are a nonissue and we need to kill more Russians, all the time.
The USAs premier precision guidance ABM has a 50% success rate in the midcourse, let alone in terminal re entry. I think counter nuking will win for now.
odd way to spell 98% lmao but keep coping!
No, bro. The Missile Defense Agency itself says the GMD has a 56% chance of killing an incoming missile. It would take 4 interceptors (per incoming missile) to have a 97% chance of it.
Lol this retard is still going, how far are the goalposts now?
>A-135
Hey, quick question. Is there a picture of the missile available somewhere? All I can find is its TEL tube, the outside of the silo, or a DIA artist's impression from 1983.
Even better, there is video:
Pretty cool isnt it?
>Pretty cool isnt it?
Oh, yeah. 100+ g's is impressive.
no it's a joke, they recorded a couple videos of missiles firing to get the smoothbrains excited and then left it to rot for the next decades. This thing wont even fail and blow itself up, it just won't work. Also
>built in 90s russia
all arguments and evidence dismissed
Delicious cope.
your concession is accepted
>Russia has X
LOL, LMAO even
PoZZian claims mean shit.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/53T6
Russia has a missile faster than Sprint.
thats not what an icbm is they have multiple warheads retard
The U.S. Navy Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System (Aegis BMD) uses RIM-161 Standard Missile 3, which hit a target going faster than ICBM warheads.[67] On 16 November 2020 an SM-3 Block IIA interceptor successfully destroyed an ICBM in mid-course, under Link-16 Command and Control, Battle Management, and Communications (C2BMC).[68]
In several tests, the U.S. military have demonstrated the feasibility of destroying long and short range ballistic missiles.[65] Combat effectiveness of newer systems against 1950s tactical ballistic missiles seems very high, as the MIM-104 Patriot (PAC-1 and PAC-2) had a 100% success rate in Operation Iraqi Freedom.[66]
Ground based mid course defence:
The system has a "single shot probability of kill" of its interceptors calculated at 56%,[1] with the total probability of intercepting a single target, if four interceptors are launched, at 97%.[1] Each interceptor costs approximately $75 million.[1]
>The system has a "single shot probability of kill" of its interceptors calculated at 56%,[1] with the total probability of intercepting a single target, if four interceptors are launched, at 97%.[1] Each interceptor costs approximately $75 million.[1]
That means we would need a minimum of 6,000 AEGIS interceptors deployed at all times to stop the 1,500 ICBMs the Strategic Rocket Forces have ready to launch any given time (not counting the thousands more that could be brought out of storage for a First Strike on NATO).
Theoretically, if I were to place four AEGIS batteries for the protection of New York City and the Russians were to fire five MIRVs at it (they always assign multiple warheads per target as a redundancy), there's
-97% probability I could intercept the first one, only to watch helplessly as the other four turn the Big Apple into the Big Apple Crisp
-50% probability I could intercept the first two, only to watch helplessly as the other three turn the Big Apple into the Big Apple Crisp
-25% probability I could intercept the first four, only to watch helplessly as the last one turn the Big Apple into the Big Apple Crisp
I like your thinking.
This is has always been the go-to method for missile defense in a nuclear war. Blow up the enemy's ICBMs before they get out of their silos.
The GMD isn't part of the AEGIS system. It's a silo-based missile
>Ywn get to defend an anti-ballistic missile silo from a surprise attack by Chinese commandos with only the aurora borealis for illumination.
fuck that pic goes hard
You are confusing sm3 with gbmd, and forgetting about patriot (and thaad). Also assuming a 100% rate of function for the Russian systems, what was the stat on US nuclear weapon maintenance spending vs Russian military budget?
Anyway, you said that it is impossible, clearly that was incorrect, if you want to now shift to the stance that it is difficult and expensive, perhaps impossible to do 100% of the time, I won’t argue this point.
>1,500 ICBMs the Strategic Rocket Forces have ready to launch any given time
that seems wildly optimistic considering their budget and the general state of the puccian military
His point is, MAD is still a thing in widespread nuclear exchange.
MAD is a nuclear posture, one of several, and one the USA does not follow.
it doesnt matter if the USA ''follows'' MAD or not, it is going to get hit in any nuclear attack scenario.
Not if russian arsenal is rendered unusable beforehand.
That's what so promising about boost-phase interception. The MIRVs can't be released while the missile is still accelerating, so if you can hit it before then, you don't need to intercept multiple targets.
The other approach is something like the cancelled (but apparently now-restarted) Multiple Kill Vehicle. The idea is basically a MIRVed ABM, where a single missile can carry several intercept vehicles.
>1,500 ICBMs
Interesting how vatniks always disseminate any numbers provided by the west but always take at face value any numbers provided(made up) by Russia
what a fucking ape
Your lies are trivial but I'm disappointed PrepHole didn't immediately call them out.
>the 1,500 ICBMs
Even by bullshit paper numbers you're fucking wrong, it's 1500 WARHEADS not ICBMs you fucking retard. It's not 1 warhead per ICBM. Russia has a few hundred actual missiles.
>thousands more that could be brought out of storage
Those are tactical, not strategic. They're for short/medium range and cruise missiles, they're completely worthless in such a scenario and would only serve to tip the west off.
America is more likely to first strike, and do so successfully, vs Russia than the other way around. That's why Russia through such a hissy fit about superfuses. ICBMs take quite awhile to reach their targets, SLBMs are what one wants for a first strike, and Russian submarines are fucking garbage at this point. All of them are shadowed 100% of the time.
thats what russia has the mobile launchers for
>trying to hide fuckhuge mobile cope tubes from sats that can count birthmarks on putin's ass when he shits
>thats what russia has the mobile launchers for
What on earth do you think this means? Most of Russia's arsenal isn't mobile, and the ones that are still aren't hard to track. None of that has anything to do with the fact that the numbers were all total horse shit. It's all about layers anyway. Intel shows launch prep, unavoidable for the liquid fueled ones. A percent get taken out in a first strike. A percent don't work. A percent out in boost. A percent taken out on reentry. A percent of warheads don't work. A percent of any left go into nuclear sponge. America is a huge country but also a highly spread out one, most of Russia's population, wealth and industry in concentrated in a relatively small area around Moscow region. America has areas all over the country.
Would even a few dozen warheads making it through in the end and working still suck? Is that risk worth a significant amount to try avoiding? Yeah, for sure. We don't have magic force fields, nuclear strike from Russia would still suck. Would it take out America? lol no. Would Russia be obliterated? Yes.
>wall of fanfiction
I accept your concession.
even in your hopium fanfiction scenario, a few satan 2s hitting LA, Chicago, DC and NY alone brings the united states to its knees. there is no escape from nuclear war
>a few satan 2s
that's already even more hopium fanfiction scenario than US intercepting all russian warheads and then bombing moscow with napalm
with what missiles? we have established in this thread the USA doesnt have jack shit to intercept anything
proceed with your hopium, magaboomer1776
yeah, what satan 2s? there's been fewer successes with them than with russian moon mission smearing debris over its surface. we've securely established that you're full of shit and rusnigeria has no nukes.
>many examples of intercept listed in thread
>NOOOOOOOoooooOOoooooo those don't couunnnnnttttt
lmao
lol even
God I wish we had a younger president who would just get this party started and supply a few thousand tomahawks to Ukraine and tell them to hit every power substation, plant, munitions factory etc they can within 1000 miles.
>a few satan 2s hitting LA, Chicago, DC and NY alone brings the united states to its knees.
It would also lower the crime rate considerably. Give and take, I guess.
>the zigger seethes at literally nothing he can form an argument against
Many such cases.
I agree with most of your statements except that of their subs, Borei class is quiet af, that's about as much as I can say
That's actually way more cost effective than I expected.
For reference, that means it would cost 1/4 the cost of the covid relief bill to have 97% effective protection against Russia launching every single nuke they have at us
Due to damage expectancy, even removing one warhead assigned to a target complicates the opposing force warhead distribution.
Contrast this the W76-1, where the MC4700 reduces warheads needed to achieve hard target kill to possibly just one.
>MC4700
Superfuse is my waifu
>Mid-20th century ICBMs are physically impossible to intercept with modern technology. If Russia launches nukes at the US, their success rate will be 100% minus their own technical malfunctions. I know mutts are generally delusional about their military might, but that's not even a question of military might, it's a question of laws of physics. Maybe they have sekrit alien lasers, Idk, but with real-world technologies ICBMs are not interceptable.
AEGIS was able to shoot down a single old Minuteman III during a test-firing in 2020. Although that obviously represents the system's capabilities only in ideal conditions. And even if we were able to get consistent interception rates near 100%, there's simply more Russian ICBMs than there are deployed AEGIS systems at any given time.
That's why we should conduct an immediate, full strength first strike
>Mid-20th century ICBMs are physically impossible to intercept with modern technology.
We destroyed a Minuteman reentry vehicle with a hit-to-kill interceptor in 1984.
>Minuteman reentry vehicle
You mean the part that actually carries the warheads to their final targets on a MIRV?
It was only an individual reentry vehicle, not a MIRV bus or group of warheads, but then again the Homing Overlay Experiment was just a proof-of-concept model.
rigged, faked test
https://www.nytimes.com/1993/08/18/us/lies-and-rigged-star-wars-test-fooled-the-kremlin-and-congress.html
Got anything that isn't behind a paywall?
stop being poor
it is, im just humoring you
It doesn't mention the Homing Overlay Experiment.
I jumped the gun. Sorry.
Wow, so they did hit it, just not under realistic conditions. Then seven years later, they hit it under more realistic conditions. And that was three decades ago.
no. nice try though.
by the way, the much vaunted GMD has also faced accusations of rigging. Like making it much easier for the kill vehicle to discern between countermeasures and legitimate warheads
and even then it still requires 4 of them to take out 1 ICBM under ideal conditions
i will repeat for anyone who is a jingostic american boomer or ukraine shill: nobody has anything that can reliably shoot down an ICBM
>nobody has anything that can reliably shoot down an ICBM
Lmao already moving the goalposts with the "reliably" there
cope.
You've reached the depression phase of grief.
youre still stuck in denial
>nobody has anything that can reliably shoot down an ICBM
The GMD has a slightly higher chance (56%) of hitting a Sarmat than the Sarmat does at failing on its own (50%).
>The reliability of a current russian spacetech can be emulated by launching a GMD missile at each device.
Russia would first need at least two functioning Sarmats for us to get data on the GMD's performance against it.
Sprint could hit RVs reliably and it was accurate enough to be HTK. The enhanced radiation warhead was the cherry on top to fry the electronics of the RV in a case of a "near miss." Ronald Reagan ended the Shittivet Union.
>accurate enough to be HTK
no it wasnt. and guess what, the US doesnt have sprint missiles
No because they replaced it with cheaper and better systems.
what systems are those? GMD? the thing that can (maybe) have a 1 in 4 chance of intercepting an ICBM, assuming the testing hasnt been faked?
>goes down with the hit rates every post
GMD requires 4 missiles to be fired to achieve a 97% hit probability
t. doesn't know how multiplying fractions work
...for a single target. GL HF dealing with a rain of 10 real and 20 fake warheads of a single ICBM.
exactly.
the US only has around 60 GBI missiles deployed as well.
there is also evidence the US faked the testing data for it
where is it
I hope they bash your empty skull in in a trench somewhere you worthless Ruskie cocksucker. Double digit iq snow ape subhuman.
>reeeeeeeeee
RKV was cancelled, but IIRC the Next-Generation Interceptor is supposed to start replacing EKVs about 2030, and they just hit the milestone for a two-stage delivery rather than three. The extra reaction time and flexibility that a two-stage deployment yields means the reliability of targets hit per interceptor should go up from that current 56%, though who knows how much.
I believe one of the NGI goals was the ability to hit more maneuverable targets than an ICBM, which might be an anticipation of that hypersonic glide vehicle the PLAAF was testing?
>the much vaunted GMD has also faced accusations of rigging
>there is also evidence the US faked the testing data for it
And yet the Russian and Chinese MICs are putting a lot of effort into new hypersonic designs and exotic delivery vehicles. That sounds like a waste of time and money -- if and only if they were confident that the U.S. was falsifying tests or exaggerating system effectiveness (or that future U.S. capabilities will never advance beyond current ones).
They said it's impossible to intercept with modern technology, not old technology. Retard
This also ignores projects like the sprint missile that show that if you are willing to use nukes to do it you can destroy mid 20th century icbms with mid 20th century technology too.
>If Russia launches nukes at the US, their success rate will be 100% minus their own technical malfunctions
So the success rate will be 30% minus the ones that get intercepted.
>Did you know US Ballistic Missile Defense has L-A-Y-E-R-S?
Whoa you have a hecking System of Elements?
No way, I'm calling Putin to tell him to surrender that's it.
literally none of those things except (theoretically) the GMD can actually intercept an ICBM
the SM3 MAYBE can intercept, if the missile launch happens close to one of them and it manages to catch it during the boost phase before it leaves the atmosphere
Technically, even the THAAD and Patriot can kill an ICBM reentry vehicle, they just have a very low probability of doing so.
Technically if all Amerimutts started shooting their guns in the air they have a small chance of hitting a reentry vehicle
>The THAAD, which has intercepted IRBMs in testing, cannot possibly intercept ICBMs because a missile with a range of 5000 km is completely different than a missile with a range of 5000+ km.
yes, it is actually. lol
the entire power of an ICBM comes from the fact that it leaves the atmosphere. it twists physics to its advantage
>the entire power of an ICBM comes from the fact that it leaves the atmosphere and gains the power of SPACE MAGIC
correct.
No wonder sarmat has a 50% failure rate with russian citizens being this retarded.
You guys have a fun concept of ballistics. Is this a new Russian version of physics where weapons teleport to their targets?
i could say the exact same thing to you
You could, but you don't realize saying so makes you a retard.
>wind
>water
>void
>earth
Kino element system tbh
>Retarded counterproductive approach when it comes to deterrence. The purpose of military might is not to bait enemy into attacking you because they think you're weak, it's to discourage them from attacking you in the first place.
Too much chest-thumping looks like overcompensation. The quiet confidence of "speak softly and carry a big stick" conveys a very different message to allies and adversaries alike.
>I know mutts are generally delusional about their military might, but that's not even a question of military might, it's a question of laws of physics. Maybe they have sekrit alien lasers, Idk, but with real-world technologies ICBMs are not interceptable.
Would I ask you to believe that the United States has an ace up its sleeve in missile defense without some sort of proof of such a system? Of course not. Pure science fiction, and I don't even know how such a system would function, let alone how it could be deployed without anybody knowing.
On the other hand, what if you asked me to believe that an entity with the enormous resources of the U.S. MIC has spent over six decades terrified of the existential threat of an ICBM swarm, but has put absolutely zero thought into a comprehensive game-changer defense? That doesn't sound plausible either.
If such a hypothetical system existed it would panic Putin and Xi, because they know exactly what THEY would do if they had unilateral immunity to MAD. Also, the more that's known about it the more other states might be able to counter it. So keeping it secret rather than using it for deterrence might be justified.
Of course, this whole hypothesis rests on the absurd notion that the U.S. could somehow leapfrog all other hypothetical research and involve tens of thousands of specialists and technicians, while compartmentalizing the whole thing so effectively that nobody would suspect the scale of the finished project, not until it was used. Pretty far-fetched, right?
>picrel
The Manhattan project leaked like a sieve, though. They had a Soviet spy literally working at Los Alamos.
This bro doesn't understand deterrence. You never show your enemy your real best stuff that's how you get killed. You show them good stuff that makes them not want to fight, but you hide your best stuff so if they are dumb enough to attack you can overpower them. The second you reveal a weapons system your enemy's will begin the process of creating counter-measures.
>Sharp weapons of the state should not be displayed, but left where nobody can see them."
>Chapter 36, Tao Te Ching (Dao De Jing) by Lao Tzu (Laozi)
>Retarded counterproductive approach when it comes to deterrence. The purpose of military might is not to bait enemy into attacking you because they think you're weak, it's to discourage them from attacking you in the first place.
Well actually logically it's a balance between two conflicting requirements. You need to reveal enough to deter your enemy without revealing so much of your capabilities that your enemy can plan around them.
>USA doesn't have a song about Minuteman 3 written by Bill Nelson
Is that the Veh Deh Veh song guy?
>oh it's just some fanfic made by retarded vatni-
>OH wait it's actually an official song made by the russian military
jesus christ
These are the people claiming that the west is filled with brainwashed NPCs btw.
I swear, after the russian collapse we are going to see some post-WW2 Germany-like levels of antimilitarism in Russia.
There won't be a Russia going forward. Russians can either accept that or die. They should never have embraced threatening the world with apocalypse regularly. The world listened and the world is now removing Russia. First its tanks, then its professional contact ground forces and marines and airborne, then its tanks and artillery, engineering vehicles, mlrs and cruise missiles. Its radars and air defences. Then the remainder of its helicopters and finally its air force and navy. Then it is going to be asked to hand over its war criminal leaders for trial and if Russia refuses its capital will be destroyed. Then two days later the next biggest city and so on. Russia itself and the Russian people are already despised internationally for their continual promotion of terrorism and extremism worldwide. They have no future, The Cyrillic character set will cease to be supported and the language will be let die. It already is. Even teh Russians here must communicate in English. Russia is over, done, finished, its only ally is North Korea which currently has a population in a state of famine. If Russia resists it dies, if it does not resist it dies, Russians don't have a say in this and what they think about it simply does not matter.
>First its tanks, then its professional contact ground forces and marines and airborne, then its tanks and artillery, engineering vehicles, mlrs and cruise missiles. Its radars and air defences. Then the remainder of its helicopters and finally its air force and navy.
Russia lost the chance to exist a while back. Its good that Russians are so fucking stupid though.
>The goblin to the left with the putin t shirt half way through
R*ssians fly more gay flags than trannies do lmao
As long as world energy prices stay high and no one deals with them militarily there will be a Russia moving forward. Unless SOMEONE intervenes in Ukraine or the US heavily ramps up heavy weapons aid Russia is on track for winning that war.
There won't be a Russia going forward and the Russian population and leadership are behaving exactly as is required for their deletion to proceed on schedule. See this thread and their stupid new threat against the world and its peoples.
This is fucking sad. The Muscovite state must be destroyed for the good of humanity.
>Russia claims
Let's just stop right there for a moment and consider Russia's track record on making truthful statements, Anon.
Russia didn't lie at all, they weren't prepared
I bet this piece of junk doesn't even fly
not with the fuel being sold off.
It's a cover story for Putins personal barrel sauna
It cannot be intercepted because nobody knows where it's going to land once fired.
Not even Russia.
It will hit Belgorod, guaranteed
>claims
this again
show me a moment in history where an ICBM was intercepted
>show me a moment in history where an ICBM was intercepted
October 2nd, 1999
maybe you need to do some research on it bro
just a bit
>claims this thing is impossible to intercept
why would it need a delivery vehicle if it "single-handedly destroys the entire world"? just set it off in moscow, not like it matters
Build Sundial and Gnomon now!
vatnik retard
cope.
>implying your shitty Satan missile won't just explode over Russia and actually reach the US
fucking lmao
cringe.
>no argument
We've seen the state of the military that Russia has been using regularly since the 90's. Imagine the state of the NOOOOKS that have never been used.
>Imagine the state of the NOOOOKS that have never been used.
Just usable enough to pop a tacnuke in a city and cause everyone to go apeshit against Russia, but not enough for any serious strike.
>in the midcourse
What is Ground-Based Midcourse Defense?
>in the terminal phase
What is every ABM missile other than the Ground-Based Interceptor?
>What is every ABM missile other than the Ground-Based Interceptor?
A fucking pebble throw at a reentry vehicle lmao. If you don't get it by mid course it's joever.
But I thought you couldn't intercept an ICBM in the midcourse either?
You can't do shit your missiles are pathetic fagget
>your missiles are pathetic fagget
Every country which has multiple types of exoatmospheric kill vehicle currently in service raise their hands. Not so fast, the rest of humanity.
thats a nice 25% interception rate you got there, you might even be able to intercept a couple nukes with all 50 of your fancy abm missile before several hundred others come raining down
>nice 25% interception rate
But I thought intercepting ICBMS was against the laws of physics?
We've gone from "the US can't intercept ICBMs" to "you can but we'll swamp your ABMs with missiles anyway"
>you might even be able to intercept a couple nukes with all 50 of your fancy abm missile before several hundred others come raining down
Denial
Anger
Bargaining <--- You are here
Depression
Acceptance
>The RKV program, headed by Boeing and lead subcontractor Raytheon, was canceled by the Department of Defense on August 21, 2019. Earlier in the year, the Pentagon had issued a stop work order on the project following a design review deferment in December 2018 due to the failure of critical components meeting technical specification
Good thing we have the GBI, THAAD, and the SM-3 then. All of which have the ability to do exo-atmospheric interceptions.
>What is every ABM missile other than the Ground-Based Interceptor?
not able to shoot down something 1 meter long coming down at mach 26
time from atmosphere re entry to target for a nuclear warhead is around 2 minutes, keep in mind a lot of nukes are also airburst
>coming down at mach 26
SM-3 goes up at Mach 13. THAAD at Mach 8.3. They're not exactly sluggish.
it doesnt matter, they simply cant reach the warhead in time. and they have never been demonstrated to do so
>they simply cant reach the warhead in time
You never took trig, huh?
>Tested 3 times
>Failed one of these times
>All tests were at 1/3rd the potential range, 1/100th the intended glide vehicle payload and a considerably lower speed than a strike on mainland US would end up with.
>Still has a 33% failure rate
The only fucking nation on gods green earth that would even consider graduating this piece of shit out of the prototype stage is Russia. They probably dont even know for certain whether the glide vehicles can even withstand its true terminal velocity
I wouldn't trust anything a vatnik says
>Russians finally say fuck it and launch an ICBM
>Putin gives "The gloves are off" speech with launch planed to happen the moment he reveals Russia is really going to use nukes
>5 seconds before launch feed cuts to missile silo
>silo door opens
>fire shoots frim silo
>Satan II ICBM launches
>2 seconds later webm happens
>somehow a couple of the warheads detonate cutting the feed
>glowies around the world collectively don this expression when they verify it was fucking real mere minutes later
>Russia somehow makes themselves an even bigger joke on the world stage
>everyone immediately dogpiles them
Imagine the fucking history books afterwards
>Russia brings out Mosin Nagants and can't into forklifts for basic logistics in 2023
>Think their nukes aren't suffering from shit maintenance
>Think they would even be accurate opposed to their cruise missiles which can't even hit airfields
that's a yikes for me dawg.
Russia manages to hit its targets on the technicality that the outer edge of 70 years of suburban sprawl are commonly considered a part of the nearest city regardless of actual municipal boundaries.
Why haven't they simply wiped Ukraine off the map? They've hit targets inside Russia now, no?
All previous (and current) Russian ICBMs in this class (R-36) were designed and built in Ukraine, so they have a significantly higher chance of working than the latest and greatest T-14/SU-57 vatnikwaffe vapor ware bullshit
>Russia claims thing
why don't they just fucking launch it then. all this talk, muh ukraine, muh yoga, muh peace age of aquarius, push the fucking button you ape.
I would love to see them launch it, then it fails. and Russia gets wiped off the map.
They got big boom boom ok but how accurate are these things? Looks to me as if russia relies on a "shotgun" strategy, but a shotgun fired from 5mi. away. Good luck trying to disable enough silos given the famous reputation of russian missile accuracy.
>Developed from 2014
Into the trash it goes. If it was some sort of Sovietpunk design, then maybe I'd believe it, but as of now its worse than Armata.
Short reminder that the Soviets came crawling to the US and begged them to end their ABM program because they couldn't afford something similar and thus the fragile balance of MAD would have been completely destroyed.
As a sign of good will the US kneecapped it's projects and publicly dismantled multiple sites that contained interceptors.
Development of these systems never stopped, though. And since the cold war is over, there is nothing stopping the US from building up those capabilities again. Which they have been doing for the last 30 years. Or not, who knows.
Oh, and it doesn't surprise that the Russian shills ITT can't believe that ICBMs or their reentry vehicles are interceptable. They live in a country that was never able to build such a system. So they lied that it is simply impossible to not look weak.
>a mere gesture of goodwill
giga cope
US cancelled a ton of projects when soviet union collapsed, primarily to ease up the tensions and get the fuckers to chill and try to act human for once. Alas, it was for naught. Hopefully we won't make the same mistake again.
both sides did, that was kind of the point of the nuclear treaties, mr genius goodwill man
>both sides
one side wasn't in the process of a total economical and social collapse at the moment, and i wasn't talking about things like Pershing II here.
Yeah, one side did it out of good will, the other because they simply couldn't afford it.
Paying public servants with vodka is not a normal thing to do, and if things got this bad you can't afford anything that is not "half a century old machine stamps AK dust covers".
Are you at least somewhat aware of how stupid you make your chosen side look?
they're projecting their ineptitude because they can never actually hope to achieve anything like this and the moment there is a reliable and numerous enough missile defense their last grasp onto the world ends and they can be slapped out of it like the useless locust bugs they are harder than saddam was.
>Short reminder that the Soviets came crawling to the US and begged them to end their ABM program because they couldn't afford something similar and thus the fragile balance of MAD would have been completely destroyed.
Source?
This is pathetic. All the pro-NATO shills in here who actually think that nukes can be shot down and Russia is totally incapable of being a nuclear threat. A MIRV comes in at 7km/s. There is no wunderwaffe that can shoot that down, nor will there ever be one. It's simple physics.
I don't support NATO or Russia at all, but I assure you that Russians can do a lot of permanent unimaginable damage if you doubt the efficacy of their nukes. If the West really thought that they had a reliable countermeasure or Russian nukes are duds, they would 100% create some casus belli and attack Russia directly, ages ago.
You can just hear Ivan's fear and desperation in this post.
>actually think that nukes can be shot down
Correct.
>and Russia is totally incapable of being a nuclear threat
Nobody has claimed that, merely pointed out what the nature of the "threat" is. Losing even a single American city would be shitty, so in that respect yeah absolutely the Rus subhuman is a "threat". But America would obliterate Russia in exchange, and thus is a much BIGGER threat the other direction and we should act like it. Russia is unlikely to lash out over anything short of a land invasion. There is no need to hold back in terms of letting Ukraine fight back.
>I don't support NATO or Russia at all,
Well I do support NATO, and you do support Russia. Hence why you keep spouting this desperate shit you've been trying to pump out since you started this war.
I've seen this same rhetoric on Reddit, that's where you guys migrated from. I'm just some Canadian dude who browses this board from time to time. Not everyone who disagrees with you is a Russian.
This board is a place where we look at conflicts and weapons with an objective and neutral view. The truth is that ICBM technology relies on very fast MIRVs and the only thing purported to intercept such things is some ground based interceptor the mutts came up with, and even that has a 2% reliability rate for 1 RV.
lol you keep just posting these long since disproven lies and keep trying to claim you're something else expecting this time it will work
>the only thing purported to intercept such things is some ground based interceptor the mutts came up with, and even that has a 2% reliability rate for 1 RV.
Got a source for that 2% number?
Your asshole is not a source, neither are your dreams.
>I'm just some Canadian dude who browses this board from time to time.
You're some leftoid American transplant in Greater Toronto Area who thinks Bernie Sanders is "too right-wing", and probably gnomish too. have a nice day.
>I've seen this same rhetoric on Reddit
well you can go back
>Source?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Ballistic_Missile_Treaty
I trust you can find your way to more detailed information and infer the reasoning in change of mind on the soviet side from there on alone.
>A MIRV comes in at 7km/s. There is no wunderwaffe that can shoot that down, nor will there ever be one. It's simple physics.
A ballistic trajectory is also simple physics. And it is known from a few seconds after the launch. from then on it's only a question of being at the right place at the right time - which is not so difficult, for ICBMs you have a few minutes even under the worst conditions to get there. For an existing system that is plenty of time.
With SLBMs it gets a bit dicey, but that's why they were always considered a bigger threat than ICBMs.
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Ballistic_Missile_Treaty
Pic rel shows that it was the Americans who suggested this first. The Americans have always been the ones to suggest reducing the amount of nukes in the world so I don't know why you would lie and say "the Soviets came crawling to the US and begged them to end their ABM program because they couldn't afford something similar and thus the fragile balance of MAD would have been completely destroyed."
This treaty comes from a time when both sides had ABM systems that used nuclear warheads to intercept incoming bombers and missiles. This meant that not only do you need a huge stockpile of offensive nuclear weapons, you also needed to have another separate huge stockpile of defensive nukes. This is why you see both Soviet and Americans having like 50,000 nukes each during the 60s and 70s.
>A ballistic trajectory is also simple physics. And it is known from a few seconds after the launch. from then on it's only a question of being at the right place at the right time - which is not so difficult, for ICBMs you have a few minutes even under the worst conditions to get there. For an existing system that is plenty of time.
With SLBMs it gets a bit dicey, but that's why they were always considered a bigger threat than ICBMs.
That's true for intermediate range ballistic missiles. ICBMs go into space and have independently targeted MIRVs which means that you would need to saturate all of the United States with some kind of interceptor that could reliably independently track and hit these things since the entire country would be a potential target given a Russian strike on the US. SLBMs were always much more dangerous because they could be launched from anywhere in the ocean giving an enemy more places to launch from.
My bad the original Ground Based Interceptor was only 2% reliable but the new one is 55% and it goes down with each MIRV.
You're a Vatnik shill that has the reading comprehension of a preschooler. Your retardation is starting to show more and more.
Show me the document that says 2% successful intercepts.
if its so simple. why has no one got a reliable countermeasure, mr genius?
Nobody has nothing if you simply deny the existence of whatever they might have.
>wunderwaffe
Sure-fire way to spot vatnik shills. Gas all russians.
No, jackass.
First of all, all interception weaponry can intercept an ICBM. The question isn't whether, but with what level of consistency. Speed doesn't really matter for leading the target when a computer is doing the calculations because they literally do not get more complex no matter how much you increase the speed unless it will actually outpace the computers capability to provide a firing solution.
It only matters in how low the margin of error is. A 0.05s miss in detonation timing isn't going to matter much against a subsonic cruise missile. Against a hypersonic weapon however, that means your shrapnel will miss by a city block.
But if you fire like 10 patriot batteries at a single incoming nuclear glide vehicle? Yeah one of those is likely to cut that fucker done. but a 10% success rate aren't fun odds when failure means a local nuclear genocide.
That being said however, as computation, guidance and ignition technologies get more and more advanced, the chance for all interceptors to take down such a fast projectiles keeps going up.
None of this has ever been demonstrated. There has never been a kinectic kill against a re entry vehicle.
Proceed with your copium.
>Khinzal cant be intercepted, because it has never been demonstrated
you would have said this before an entire volley of them got shot down, don't deny it.
And to follow up on this:
MAD hasn't existed for the west since the fucking 00's. The number of nuclear warheads and corresponding delivery devices has simply dropped by such a massive degree. If you look at the current simulations of all out nuclear war between Russia and the West, the picture isn't rosy with about 350+ million dead assuming all missiles succeed in launching (Which given Russia's low maintenance budget and retarded decision to stick to liquid fueling is a bit excessive).
No doubt, this would qualify the single greatest tragedy in human history, and for the west would constitute the greatest civilization calamity since the black plague. But here is the thing; a calamity for us it would be, but it wouldn't be a civilization ending disaster. It would set us back a generation, but the west would survive it with about 75% of its populace walking it off. Perhaps a few nations will balkanize but that is about it. Even if 4/5th of Russia's nuclear launch devices are non-functional, the cost of life would still be insane for any human of sound mind to willfully pay.
For Russia the picture however is a lot more dire. Whereas the west has an incredibly spread out populace across hundreds if not thousands of urban centers to the point that even if saturation of decision centers and hostile launch sites wouldn't eat up 50% of the nuclear target list, you'd still struggle to wipe out more than 20% of our urban centers (see picrel, which is no longer feasible for Russia (they no longer have 2000 missiles) and excludes the need to target Europe), Russia has a very densely clustered populace focused around about 2-3 dozen urban centers.
It would be expected to lose north of 130 million people in nuclear retaliation.
The west would be set back two generations by a nuclear exchange.
Russia would be set back to the stone age.
Russia fully knows this, which is why any talk about Russia chimping out is exclusively made by idiots.
>MAD isnt a thing
>sure, we would ONLY lose a hundred million people or so and all our major cities and infrastructure, but my farm in bumfuck alabama would be fine!
>and they would be worse!
These posts are my favorite kind of delusion.
It's hardly delusion, you simply do not understand MAD as a concept.
MAD is defined as an outcome of total destruction of both parties. You are implying that i said Russia has no deterrence. It does. What i'm saying is that Russia does not have the ability to end western civilization in a suicidal act of spite.
It cant. It would merely maim it before being reduced to ash itself.
That is standard nuclear deterrence. Not MAD. They differ
You are stupid, deluded, worthless a propagandist for an inept dictator in a cargo cult utterly corrupt war crime state called Russia on the margins of civilisation where one in five people don;' even have indoor plumbing or a toilet. You are in no position to call anyone deluded.
Try and stop the world from erasing Putin, Russia, teh Russian military and ultimately (you). Guess what? You can't. Feel free to die trying. You will anyway, The world has had enough of Russian shit and its lying worthless hate and evil spamming morons like you and its threats to destroy the world so Russia and Russia are being wiped out. You may not understand or believe this but that really really does not matter. It is.
Good post acknowledging it's the most pessimistic assessment (which isn't unreasonable as a baseline). In actuality while nobody knows perfectly for certain, the facts we DO know are that compact nuclear warheads all decay and must be refreshed regularly. Ultra long shelf life nukes can be done, but they don't fit on ICBMs and have poor efficiency. We know there has been no real world testing in a very long time. We know the US has spent absolutely enormous amounts of money, far more than Russia's entire military budget, and tremendous technological effort (repeatedly world's biggest super computers, top PhDs modeling it) fed by more modern serious data (including conventional efforts like Minor Scale), without all the corruption and stupendously more accountability, on maintaining an arsenal that is on paper smaller than Russia's. Nukes are a prime natural corruption target. Being serious: there is absolutely 0% chance that all of Russia's nuclear warheads still work. None.
Even the USSR concluded towards the end that they had lost MAD to a significant degree, with the big saving grace being (and STILL being) that the West values its people and infrastructure far, far FAR more than Russia does, and have gotten far more loss averse than in the 50s/60s. One of the tradeoffs of democracy and advancing civilization. So in terms of politics and value it hurts us more to lose a good city or industrial area or whatever than Russia getting flattened. So 1% of MAD is still serious deterrence. If in the heart of the cold war we knew 100% we'd lose one city in exchange for all of the USSR? We might have actually done it. Now in 2023? We don't care that much about the old ideological competition anymore, losing even one city in a calculated manner wouldn't be acceptable (though obviously we'd take revenge).
But yeah Russia knows their nukes are only good as long as they aren't used.
We also know you are coping and spewing utter nonsense
The problem of Russias nuclear deterrence isnt the nukes, though realistically speaking the nukes of both sides will have about a 10-20% dud rate due to how relatively untested nuclear triggers are, even in pristine condition; the US and Russia regularly inspect eachothers stockpile.
The problem is the ICBMs; they are monstrously expensive to maintain, prone to catastrophic fail at both launch and reentry if anything is fucky wucky, and russia for whatever godforsaken reason still uses liquid fueling; which everyone else stopped using because in exchange for range you lose readiness and more importantly, you gain a shitton of maintenance overhead and have to repair them every time they are moved into readiness. They are costly beasts and nothing in the Russian nuclear budget even vaguely suggest they can maintain 1600+ of them in launch state. Omitting of course the fact that any mobile nuclear launcher older than 20 years not used in parades has its rocket visibly rusting and mossing over
>realistically speaking the nukes of both sides will have about a 10-20% dud rate due to how relatively untested nuclear triggers are
while it's technically not MAD, russia knows that the west absolutely does not want to be set back 2-3 generations and will do everything to avoid this disaster. so for all practical reasons, this is MAD.
also remember that most politicians (and most people in general) are only able to rationally think 1-5 years ahead. not whole ass generations. no one is going to press that button thinking "oh we'll be ok in just a few lifetimes"
And the West knows Russia doesn't want to be sent back to the Stone Age too. Which means the West is free to attack Russia directly so long as it's better than leadership all dying. In other words there is no more MAD anymore, only limited deterrence. The question is merely "when will Russian elites decide to commit suicide?"
Please refrain from using that garbage meme map, even ironically.
I can post the link, but I can't make you read it.
https://pastebin.com/cWs6A7rR
>unironically posting game theory
Outdated cringe.
Your moms dildo
Do not want
Send to San Francisco or NYC
>Puts 100 grams of metal powder on a collision trajectory with your ascending rocket
Nothing personal, kid.
They claimed their army was unstoppable
Claimed it could single handily take over the world
How did that work out for them?
Which ook nook thread is this in the last day or two? With the same disingenous lying vatmoron gay ramping up the post counter no less. Is there something going on that would revigorate the nook thread shilling at this point?
will owning imaginary muttboomers with mindless lie parroting mean that russia stops retreating?
I'm going to hazard a guess and say important parts of Tokmak are exploding right now.
i'm not the one spamming ESL gibberish here to cope with rusmorons being ground into dirt along with your commie ambitions
Is projections and >n-no u's all that vatmorons are good for? The stupidity required for such persistent mindless spam for entire threads is mind boggling.
>Russia claims
If that alone doesn't answer your fucking question, I don't know what to tell you.
it's good that you consider yourself and your posts worth so much less than mine that getting pity (you)'s are a victory to you. it's one thing you're correct about.
not a single one of them was disproven though? the only thing disproven so far is the "satan" ii actually being a functional missile let alone the warheads on it working lmao
>10 MIRVs
>When you're treaty limited in how many MIRVs you can deploy
I dunno, the US and now Chinese doctrine of having land based silos in the middle of nowhere with the least possible amount of warheads for deterrent seems to be superior to the road mobile ICBM with large throw weights. It seems like having a target area act as a warhead sink for your enemy while you put most of your warheads to sea seems much preferable from a strategic standpoint.
russia<>strategy
mobile ICBM transporters are a shithole meme and any "advantages" are just to hide the fact that that country can't afford to build silos. You don't just press a button and launch the missile while you are inside, it actually takes a long time to set these things up. And they have zero protection against nuclear and conventional weapons, that is why russia is hiding all their missile transporters from the cardboard menace.
Truth is world does not care anymore, most people just want the next communist/dictator/mullah and especially Russian that opens his fucking mouth about nukes to get burnt alive no matter what. 70 years of these worthless pricks making threats. Fry them. Start with Moscow. As regards claims by Russians, lies as ever. Nuke them
I'm
and I don't go that far. I think at least 18% of Russia's nuclear arsenal "works" (by which I mean can still come within and 50 miles CEP and still some yield even if reduced, not a total dud) and since the US unfortunately has not had the strategic goal of stopping everything but rather countering norks and such at least a few might get through. That could still cause 200-900 billion dollars in damage depending on our luck. So it's absolutely worth SOME effort to try to not have it happen, just not unlimited effort.
In this case I'd like to see widespread conventional attacks on clear military/strategic targets first. Something that would wreck Russia's military potential but could still leave their shitty leaders alive and in power though if any civil war breaks out awesome. But that they'd be unlikely to kill themselves over. And American intel is so fucking good at this point and Russia so corrupt that I'd be stunned if spooks hadn't bribed their way in a thousand places, so we'd have solid warning of any real strike effort. Taking warheads out of depots or fueling all liquid ICBMs isn't stealthy, and launching just a handful (which they could do by surprise) would be even more pointless, suicide for nothing at all. There's a lot we can do to put them back in their ghetto forever while having low chance of pushing monke to insanity.
>. I think at least 18% of Russia's nuclear arsenal "works"
That's nice, shame about its delivery systems OPs wunderwaffen I assume is the best of it and it has a 50% fail rate in tests.....
Today is a good day to nuke Russia. The only reason not to nuke them today is they are weaker tomorrow. However Russia must be nuked and cannot be allowed to continue. 70 years of nuclear blackmail and threats from that shithole and its dictators is enough. Let's go.
many things Russia claims are far detached from reality...
is this different? naaah.
About the Russo-Ukrainian war, you have to understand that Ukraine at this point is a skeleton state. It's surviving off of donations, financial and military, from the West. Every detail about this whole war points to the conclusion that it's quite literally a proxy war between NATO and Russia. So, yeah, you are going to see Russia come up short and fail in a lot of ways, but you have to understand that they are essentially fighting a NATO that's wearing Ukraine like a glove.
Regardless, I think everyone expected a lot more from the Russians.
You just went full retard, Vatnik. Never go full retard.
>Monke chimps out one time too many
>America launches invasion force
>All of Europe ready to take out the Tsars nukes
>Nothing happens
>Vatniks surrender immediatly
>Monke is found in Siberian hole in ground
>Nukes are found to be non functional and stripped to hell
>Monke led before tribunal
>World cant wait to see him give a statement
>He gets led onto the stage
>He leans into the microphone, a look of defeatism on his face
>ook ook
It’s a fractional-orbit missile which makes it more difficult to intercept, not impossible. By their nature of skimming the bottom rung of orbit instead of the traditional ballistic missile flight profile they can mask their intended target until the terminal phase. They were looked at during the 60s-70s and determined to be not worth the weight budget dedicated to a tougher missile body. This issue has probably been resolved to some degree with modern materials.
They were also brought up in anti-nuke talks in the 70s by the Russians since they realized there was nothing preventing the USA from developing their own FOBS and thus wouldn't provide any advantage.
Oh, and a 200+ reply thread and I’m the ONLY one who knows anything about the Sarmat? Good Lord.
If you 'know' anything its bullshit from Russian propaganda and Russia has demonstrated itself in the league tables of time and space to be the most lying and bullshitting nation on earth at present.
claims
nobody really knows since a MIRV hasn't been intecepted ever and nobody HERE knows especially because they (and you) are retard war tourist fags
>Russia claims
that's all you need to know
Cool provocative nuclear weapon you've got there. Unfortunately on the strategic level it's not fucking useful for anything their existing systems don't already do.
If it can be detected someone can attempt to intercept it, if it can't be intercepted, then the only reasonable reaction is to immediately initiate a full exchange.
Satan 2 is a parade piece and offers no useful capability.
Can a Sarmat missile launch a Luna-25 probe to the moon?
>legit or full of shit PrepHole?
i don´t know, but make PrepHole seethe for sure.
what if actual Satan is bottled up in that missile and that's the weapon system
>impossible to intercept
If I see one of them flying over my city I'll shoot it down with my AR
>insist they are the good ones
>are christian, orthodox russian
>calls their rocket Satan
And we should believe they are the hero?
Russian claims or Western media claims?
It's mostly the latter.
its fractional bombardment
its very hard to intercept if it works, probably practically impossible
it probably doesnt work
If the CIA is even half as powerful as thirdies and tankies claim they are, then it really doesn't matter what weapons they have in their arsenal. They're fucked either way.
I'm safe because I turned myself into an onion.
What was the last claim Russia made that turned out to be true?
>Kinzhals: slapped the fuck down by Patriots
Hypersonics were investigated by late war Germans and patented shortly thereafter. They're not special, at all. Russia and China can bet the farm and be nuclear holocausted by a couple of SSBNs and 3rd NATO parties not interested in being their nu-Soviet satraps.
All I have seen is Russia lying on this board for a decade, exaggerating their weapons and military ability and often spending years spamming noise about weapons that don;t really exist or exist in any quantity such as their Armata Tank, SUS7 etc. One of Russias favorite forms of public relations like North Korea is threatening to destoy the wprld if their dictator is unhappy.. The Rusisas like to make stupid propaganda for their population saying they have a nuclear torpedo that can kill hundreds of millions and permanently irradiate land making it uninhabitable via a radioactive tsunami for example. This is complete nonsense. In general Russia is a corrupt backward, savage, dysfunctional and dystopian place. It excels at nothing, particularly technology such as electronics and never has. Russia never managed even with the occupied nations of the warsaw pact to make a basic consumer car that could rival anything western. Nuclear warheads contain a detonator and electronics. A radioactive component made of tritium which decays and emits radiation is a vital component. The radiation from its decay damages the electronics slowly making it worthless. The tritium and electronics must be replaced roughly every decade. The missile must have the warhead removed, it must be transported to a secure location where the new expensive parts must be fitted and the device reassembled and then securely returned to deployment, often in remote locations. The missiles themselves also require maintenance which is expensive. It appears Russia never spent this money and even the money it says it spent may have been siphoned off by corruption which is an endemic feature of everything in modern Russia from the top down. Russia likes to propagandise it can end the world. It can't the world can end Russia and probably should as the Russian state has consistently voiced its aspiration to destroy the world for 70 years. Russians leader seems to wish Russia to cease to exist. Fine.
Much of the USSRs nuclear missile and warhead technology was created in Ukraine for them. Specifically in Kharkiv. That won't be happening. Russia even if its entire stockpile were to function does not have the military capacity to create 'mutually assured destruction' or destroy he USA or EU or NATO. There are some estimates that 14% of Russians roughly 6000 nuclear warheads may work perhaps with a reduced yield. However teh Russians apparently don't know in the vats majority of cases which ones those actually are. Their main means of getting them out of Russia and firing them include their ';strategic bomber fleet' a range of poorly maintained large aircraft that are visible quite literally from space and can be destroyed at will by NATO. Russias best delivery mechanism is its nuclear submarines, these are tailed at all time by several NATO hunter killers and if they even look like entering a launch profile without dialogue in advance explaining why will be decoyed. Finally, Russias missile silos. Pic related. And its new ICBM? It is a product of Russia in terminal decline, its very worst cargo cult tier effort top look like the USSR, it has failed repeatedly in testing and has never been tested in conditions that would approximate the stress of actual use in speed, acceleration or distance. Further NATO has evolved quite a few technologies that may well destroy part of such an attack in the unlikely event that it gets off the ground. NATO signals intelligence so vastly overmatches Russia that very little of the Russian missile forces or their command would be left if NATO even thought they were seriously about to try. However the fact remains that teh Russian state and people do aspire to destroying the world even if unable to and considering that must be eliminated. This is being done. Pic related is from from an extremely well known journalist who was active thorough the fall of the USSR and the cold war.
>Russia claims
Goodbye Russia. You won't be missed by anyone. Even your tankie 'friends' will evaporate and pretend they never knew you and find some other dictators tit to suck
https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/ukraine-crisis-intercepts/
Ukraine’s counteroffensive was in its second month when Andrey, a Russian soldier, called his wife to say his unit was taking heavy casualties. They were so badly equipped, he said, it felt like the Soviet forces in World War Two.
“They are fucking us up,” Andrey said by telephone on July 12, comparing the onslaught to the worst moments of Germany’s invasion of the Soviet Union. “No fucking ammunition, nothing ... Shall we use our fingers as bayonets?”
The conversation was one excerpt from 17 phone calls placed by Russian soldiers fighting in the south and east of Ukraine that were intercepted in the first two weeks of July by the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU), the country’s main intelligence agency.
The expletive-laden intercepts, shared with Reuters by a Ukrainian intelligence source, provide a rare - albeit partial - glimpse into the conditions of some Russian soldiers as Kyiv prosecuted a major counteroffensive, which started in early June, two military analysts told Reuters.
>Russia claims
yeah, I think you know the answer
WOW!