Why didnt the Soviets do an Iwo Jima to the Americans? What I mean by that is, why didnt they focus on ABM systems and bunkering rather than compete in the pure first strike race. Why didnt they strive to survive a first, second, third strike when they can rise up and make a decisive offensive engagement in central europe? Sure they would be on the backfoot at the peace signings, but they can still get international support like that.
Because 1) your only nuclear option is that your boipussy can take any load the West throws at it, and 2) your boipussy may not be able to take the load the West has and may prolapse immediately
What if they half survived 2), underwent a coup and became the US bitch slave proxy against china?
They would likely see a significant improvement in quality of life, economic prosperity and education, albeit with some cringe liberalism as a downside
I gotta ask- do people really think being conscripted as a human meat-shield is preferable than having to deal with pride-parades?
I mean I get if you don't like them, and think that they should have some pushback. That's all within the realm of democracy. I'm just saying if the choice is being presented as 'either we have to live in a dictatorship or we have to treat the gays nice' are the gays really that much of a problem? You know, assuming we're not all buying into a bunch of conspiracies about the garden gnomes that is.
Autocratcs and lovers of them have self-inflated egos and are retard by default. This is also why they fucking implode. Just look at pre-2020 and how everyone fapped to China, Russia, Iran and other shitholes led by "strong men".
Then look at how the US and Friends are doing.
Conscripted soldiers are necessary to group survival, and the gay movement is directly opposed to group survival. The modern progressive lifestyle is basically just taking a short term bribe to drop out.
Suburbs got popular because people starting families didn't want to stay in cities, which are really shitty places to have kids. It became profitable because of that demand. Industrial urbanization was always hated and only happened when people didn't have the economic power to avoid it.
In any case, it's suicide to take a large scale nuclear strike. Deterrence was their only hope. Even building survival bunkers under mountains is more useful for supporting deterrence than taking the hit, since it may make the enemy question whether a first strike would be effective enough.
were talkin' about zigger boipussy, I'm pretty sure it can take any load
Because everyone agrees second strike is fucking moronic.
If the bad guys are gonna throw all their nukes at you, what's the logic in not throwing all your nukes at them as well? Cause what if the bad guys nuke your capital or nuclear missile silos, and your 'reserve' nukes can't be fired? You've just let the enemy blow you up more than you blew them up, and assuming the war still exists then they're going to have the advantage.
Early ABM systems were extremely easy to saturate. Modern ones are still straightforward to saturate.
This is a poor analogy because 1) Iwo Jima fell, and 2) half the reason we nuked Japan is so we didn't have to do Iwo Jima the Sequel: This Time It's Personal.
>Iwo Jima sequel
But anon, we did do that, that was Okinawa
The trilogy then.
>I gotta ask- do people really think being conscripted as a human meat-shield is preferable than having to deal with pride-parades?
Plenty of shitholes have both, and we might soon too.
>Then look at how the US and Friends are doing
Doing much worse internally. The most shocking thing about the Wagner coup was that even in the midst of the rebellion, their cities were incredibly clean and orderly compared to any place hit with the diversity bomb.
You don't really need autocracy to fix that though, just going back to pre-1960s democracy is good enough.
I don't think you know what the 1960's are. Or autocracy. Or democracy. Or diversity. Or coup.
Man fuck Okinawa.
I remember reading about the battle E.B.Sledge's memoir, the entire island was a hellish quagmire of bodies, blood and excrement.
They simply CAN'T. The Soviet population was and still is clustered in 3 or 4 population centers, and if NATO hit first they'd wipe out most of the USSR and then defeat in detail the survivors. The US is far more likely to survive nuclear war because of it's suburbs (contrary to popular belief if wasn't rayyyyism but nuclear war that created suburbs) and the distribution of population centers.
>because of it's suburbs
Not exactly but sure
>spread population across a huge area
>not really
Are you fucking serious?
The modern suburbs was created as a means of rewarding WW2 vets. We basically sold them a quarter acre of land with a house despite it being unprofitable.
>suburbs didn't get started until the 1950's
>reward WW2 vets
The suburbs were created as a way to bridge the gap between urban and rural populations as industrialization and urbanization accelerated, and with nuclear war becoming a possibility simply expanding cities wasn't seen as ideal.
Yes actually. The US had tons of major industrial centers, ports, and rich farmland everywhere before everyone started living in suburbs. Historically, New York was far and away the biggest most important port in America. Now it's LA-Long Beach. If you wanted to eliminate the ability for the US to get materials from over the Atlantic, taking out New York wouldn't cut it in the slightest. The whole East Coast is littered with harbors suitable for ocean going ships, some of which you've probably never even heard of. Hell, even just taking out the port facilities of New York would be a tall order given how spread out they were all along Manhattan, Brooklyn, Queens. And that's just that's just the city itself, not including the miles of containers and cranes in Bayonne, Elizabeth, and Newark. Suburbs had nothing to do with it.
>building ports
>building the infrastructure to move any materials from said ports
>after your population has just been reduced by 40-60%
Anon... I...
ports
Who said anything about that? The point iwas that there was already shitloads of ports even just on one coast, so it would have been infeasible for the Soviet Union to prevent the US from using the Altantic.
Funny how suburbs existed years before the US lost its nuclear monopoly (and at the time, it was believed it would take the Soviet Union twenty years to develop their own atomic bomb).
First off, no bunker design could stand up to a direct hit from a nuke. Even Cheyenne mountain couldn't take that kind of hit and they built it under a Fucking Mountain.
Second, we only developed ABMs by the mid 60s and ten years later the anti-ballistic missile treaty was signed. MIRV could too easily overwhelm an ABM system and MAD was considered the status quo.
>couldn't
?
>What I mean by that is, why didnt they focus on ABM systems and bunkering rather than compete in the pure first strike race
Look at how long it has taken to get to semi-compenant missile defenses
It's easier to throw rocks than to use a sling to knock enemy rocks away
Because Russians have a giant chip on their shoulders about being “nekulturnye”…uncivilized country bumpkins.
This gives them a giant inferiority complex that they not-so-secretly feel that they’re not good enough. So they copy our tech and our doctrine and our culture.
We Yanks are nekulturnye too, but WE revel in our Redneckism, and urinate all over homosexual EU “sophisticates”.
I wish the Russkis weren’t such stereotypes of morose Appalachian opioid addicts and get over themselves…we could be such great pals, together stomping on Europe’s withered and faggy old balls and thumping pagan savages in the head to bring them to Lord Jesus.
Instead they drink, smoke dope, and feel sorry for themselves…
>EU
>cultured
The EU is the EXACT OPPOSITE of culture, it's actively anti-culture. Europeons love to claim that the US has no culture, but that's the equivalent of a fish claiming water isn't a thing. There hasn't been ANY cultural relevance from Europe for almost 100 years, no great musicians that weren't copying American invented styles, no authors, no movies, nothing but failed political ideology.
Post indoor plumbing.
>nooo you're Indian
Get fucked.
Not true, a lot of the garbage music you hear on the radio these days is heavily European influenced, likewise for garbage politics you see on the news. It gets even worse when you realize much of mainstream American entertainment and media is made with foreign audiences in mind. Thus to counter your point, Europe does have a culture. It's just trash and its prolific trashiness is a major reason why contemporary American culture is lower quality than in the past.
A Dutch company had a finger on almost every reality or game show since the 2000s. Basically you either pay them to use the license in your country (like Big Brother) or to create your copycat shows under a different name without getting sued.
>but WE revel in our Redneckism
Unironically yes.
t. American
P.S. Yeehaw.
>So they copy our tech and our doctrine and our culture
I mean that's what you're meant to do. Do the shit that works. If what that other guy is doing works, steal his shit. That's how Japan modernized, they stole the Prussian Army and British Navy. Cause those were good things to steal. In fact the Russians suck so much in Ukraine because they refuse to steal the NATO army.
I also want to point out there's basically two strains in Russian society- they both agree that Russia is a poor backwards authoritarian shithole, but you have the Westernizes who say that's a bad thing, and that they need to modernize, industrialize, and liberalize. And the Slavophiles who say that it's actually a good thing because it's what seperates them from the 'woke' west, and that if anything they should be EVEN MORE authoritarian.
They're still fapping to them though, that's what confuses me.
No he's right. The first suburbs were built on a potato farm in Long Island New York for returning vets in 1945. They were considered quite tacky at first actually because they were the same house in a barren field. Wasn't until decades later after they'd been in the families a while and they made additions and planted trees that they looked nice.
But also suburbs massively expanded in the 50's in 'white flight' as a response to all the black people who had moved into the inner cities for factory jobs in WW2. And also because car-ownership went up massively, so commuting to work became possible for the average joe.
Nuance you know, two things can be true at the same time.
>but WE revel in our Redneckism
fucking right we do
You do realize the jappos lost at Iwo, right? Bunkering ONLY works if you have more men/material than your enemy. The USSR might have had more men, but they were woefully behind in terms of the quality of the material.
Americans could have sieged the island and do night bombardment. The japs could not survive without external supplies.
We were ALREADY doing that.
I know people don't people pay attention in history classes, but why do people think like the US were like 'either we nuke Japan or we surrender'?
The USSR didnt even have more population than the US, and it was absurdly more concentrated
>The USSR didnt even have more population than the US
US Population 1990: 248,710,000
USSR Population 1990: 287,728,000
Anti-ballistic missile systems were (and still are) more expensive than ballistic missiles. It was far more effective (from a game theory standpoint) to build two ICBMs than one ICBM and one ABM.
Reliable ABM requires you to invest several times as much effort and resources to stop a strike than it costs your opponent to put that strike together. This makes it a complete nonstarter if you're the one who is economically at a disadvantage.
So we can just use words randomly with no context?
Country music ruined star wars.
Just shut up. You're not actually helping discussion at all
>inb4 you get offended and try to derail the thread
I don't think anyones helping.
kruschev wanted to. He believed that communism was inevitable, so the only real need was to support proxies and maintain a nuke deterrent, and that all the .mil money could be better spent on socialist causes (medicine, schooling, research). Naturally, Kruschev got replaced and "out with the old", as they say.
Because of the nuclear paradox. While I have disproven ODT in one of my papers already, the nuclear paradox that was a result of the deliberations on that seem to hold true.
Or you know, white cops didn't solve black crimes during segregation.
common gleeful leopard risk moan
ok bot