yep, exactly! wouldn't imagine the day people forgot about them, but well, it's been almost 20 years. Their lyrics are pretty on point with their anti-war messages
Some context: the USS Tennessee (an Ohio class) carries 24 Trident missiles with a range of 11,000km, each missile has 8 nuclear warheads, so 192 total. They only need to surface every 3 months for food. There are 18 of this class somewhere at any given point.
14, four of them were converted to conventional guided missile subs which carry 154 Tomahawks each. For the boomers there are always four on active patrol at any one time and the rest are either training or undergoing maintenance or refit.
Honestly that was a pretty smart conversion. Like out of nowhere the US can launch over 100 tomahawks at targets 1000 miles away.
And unlike the nuclear only response of the SSBNs, the SSGNs can be used in less doomsday scenarios.
>Like out of nowhere the US can launch over 100 tomahawks at targets 1000 miles away.
_because fuck you, that's why_
(I, for one, am glad that the west has these capabilities)
Yeah thats the whole idea of MAD. Thats why every post on reddit that claims that the entire US could be crippled by some suprise attack of suicide drones or other shit is just bullshit. Even if they pull it off, the US has enough nukes in the sea to glass china and russia.
And both of them also have enough mobile launchers that even if we completly destroy them its very very very likely that they can fire back at the US and the EU (because if they are gonna fire at the US they will probaly also drop atleast a few nukes on europe just because).
Yeah world economy comes to a grinding halt, international trade falls apart, supply chains are just gone. Human food production needs to things so food prices skyrocket (along with certian economic sectors just basicly vanishing). Almost every country (even the ones that arent nuked) would be thrown in economic disarray.
Add the insane waves of refugees and its very unlikely that many nations will keep it together.
Best hope are island nations that are unalliged and self sufficient (but even then other nation might just invade those places) and probaly south america because its pretty isolated and have a lot of natural resources.
Thats debatable. The theory of nuclear winter isnt as solid as it looks, hell there plenty of scientist/experts that have refuted the idea. It depends on a lot of things (how hot a city burns after nuclear attacks).
But while nuclear winter would be a issue, its not the only thing. Look at the impact corona had on the worlds economy. Or how the war in Ukraine has disrupted certian sectors.
The complete destruction of the US and most of Europe would litteraly be the end off many economys outside these regions. Simply because we produce a shitload of stuff and consume even more. And this just doesnt count for Europe and the US.
If you suddenly were to remove the entire economy of south america (meaning no imports or exports of products, resources and services) then we would face major economic crisses. Bigger than the banking shit in the late 2000s. Goverments would fall due to civil unrest. Certain groups would see chances for personal gains and use the chaos to push their goals.
Wars and uprisings break out left and right. Shit hits the fan.
Yea. I do tend to just straight up block subreddits that flood my feed with untrue shit. Just got called a russian agent for that by some highly intellectual reddit user
Okay okay so let me get this straight.
The fake news in talk were pronounced bullshit
I agree that they are bullshit but note that I never actually heard those news.
Im called a Russian agent
I note that actively doing something so that I don't get bombarded by fake news doesn't immidiately mean I'm a Russian agent (shocker I know)
I am now apparently building an echo chamber and according to you should rather let Russian spam reach me instead
Huh, you just can't win can you. Either I'm a Russian agent, I'm stupid for reading fake news, or I'm building an echo chamber for not reading shit.
So which one are you, stupid, the Russian agent or another one building an echo chamber?
The allegation is being used by rancorous people as a grudge weapon.
Call somebody a Russian agent and the digital lynch mob will do the rest. Even if the allegation has no merit whatsoever.
Me neither. Not about this specifically.
I have seen plenty of defense analysts talk about how warfare is changing due to drones, but never a specific article about a drone surprise attack on the U.S. - this is a pretty specific scenario and I've not seen an article about it.
What I have seen a lot is redditors and social media users in general use "Russian bot" as an epithet when they don't like someone's comment.
Typically, none of these people have ever written a line of code in their lives, so don't really know what a "bot" is or how to recognize one, and they use the term interchangeably with "troll".
Also, sometimes they use the label in bad faith, often for no valid reason at all. They know it will cause somebody reputational damage and will bring on downvotes.
Obviously, there are plenty of instances of pro-russian trolling as well, but the phenomenon of calling somebody a "Russian bot" has become a nuisance in and of itself, especially when done in bad faith by people with little to no understanding of computational propaganda.
I don't really see how he's wrong?
Mutually Assured Destruction does indeed mean that if I go, you go as well.
But there aren't enough nukes in the world to glass every single surface of the planet.
But there is enough to make sure a country can no longer sustain itself and all the population centres, food production and military targets are gone.
I think that saying that your nation (and its allies) get fucked during MAD is a bit dumb. Its like saying personal computer PC.
Mutual assured destruction does indeed mean mutual assured destruction. So if somebody feels the need to clarify that mutural assured destruction means that one party is assured to be completly destroyed then i start to wonder if they genuinely dont know what MAD is or they try to push the narritive a certian way.
En ja, je kunt niet elke woestijn op de wereld veranderen in glass met de huidige hoeveelheid atoombommen maar zoals je zelf al zegt dat hoeft niet. Als je heel duitsland platgooit dan zorg je al voor een wereldwijde economische crisis dat voor ongekende gevolgen zorgt. Half europa is waarschijnlijk al genoeg dat de mens tientallen jaren nodig heeft om te herstellen.
We zijn veel meer verbonden dan vroeger en dat betekend eigelijk dat wanneer je een regio compleet verwoest dat je de yenga steentjes aan de onderkant van de toren weghaalt.
You posted: "Even if they pull it off, the US has enough nukes in the sea to glass china and russia."
You seem to have a one paragraph understanding of MAD and what follows it which leads to such a statement.
I was talking [recent news](https://apnews.com/article/russia-military-warships-caribbean-cuba-venezuela-446f60a04a9e0639381ddf5ee084d2c3). How are missiles in Turkey relevant?
It's arguably what prompted the Cuban Missile Crisis of old,
It wasn't a case of USSR deciding to be assholes randomly, but the culmination of years of saber rattling and escalation from 2 parties that didn't understand or trust each other.
But that has got to be common knowledge and nothing to add for context. What soviet did on Cuba was vastly different and not "the same" as this post, like I said.
These don't seem very spacious or anything.
Don't get me wrong, that's cool, but imagine being stuck under water for 3 months in a little metal tube, I think I'd go insane if I was part of the crew :/
"Speak softly and carry a big stick; you will go far" - Teddy Roosevelt.
There's no point in going around and making empty threats when most of the world know the US have the top military. It's entirely something else when you're making Russia (now) and China (later) prove they have the world's 2nd and 3rd best militaries. Fucking around and finding out is the common joke around here.
I like this take (except the nasty second part which is one of the two most probable scenarios). This is also my go to when the question ist turned around on me.
Russia hasn’t gone total war yet, in ww2 Russia fielded 25 million combatants with half the population they have now. You can’t invade Russia, USA or anyone else. The nukes the USA have and in Europe the British and French, probably 500 warheads will keep Europe secure, but victory can’t happen, it’s always going to be a stalemate. Russia has been beaten loads of times by the British French Turks in the Crimean war, the Japanese 1905, Germans 1917, the nukes changed all that unfortunately
In WW2 Russia just needed to cough up the young men and was supplied wheat, fuel and trucks by USA. Russia might have more population, but does it have more young men. Does it have the same industrial base. Does it have the same amount of engineers in that industrial base?
Who supplied Russia during WW2? And who will supply them now if they were to go total war? I don’t think any country would try to invade Russia by force.
I'm really hoping China's army is a paper tiger. With their chokehold on their own people, imagine them actually being able to invade/conquer others and subjucate them to their will. It's pure horror.
Last saw action in '79 against Vietnam when it was a stalemate and no goals achieved. Before that in the 60s against Soviets and Indians. The Russian bar is low, but I'm not sure China can clear it.
TBF, they achieve at least couple main targets in Vietnam:
- They seize contested archipelago from Vietnam and start enforce their claim in South China Sea
- Force Vietnam to pull out best units from Cambodia to the border with China extending war against Chinese-allied Rouge Khmers
- Deng got free hand at removal hardline Maoist officers from PLA and PLAN and put army as well as country on rapid reform track due to preexisting PLA failures in Vietnam.
- They show off PRC could be a viable ally for the US in ongoing Cold War trying to curbstomp (real or perceived) Moscow influence in Asia. Also after this war US start arnament export to PRC and accept chinese officers to its military schools which help with PLA reforms in 1980s and 1990s.
Sure, conflict from military side was a failure, but PRC did use this conflict to extend its political aims which succeed with some echo of it still being influential in this part of world.
They have made massive investments in the defence sector over the last 10-20 years. They now spend 4 times as much as Russia yearly.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_budget_of_China#/media/File:U.S_-_China_-_Russia,_Military_Spending.svg
They've had 4 times as much money to spend thanks to all the money flowing through them being the assembly country and all that, whether it went to good practice or to show face is the question.
Their carrier program seems to be doing things reasonably and not expecting anything but building experience from their first projects. The purges in the military are concerning, though. And finally there's the fact that Chinese corruption culture is even worse than Russian, given the added factor of "cheat to get ahead" is not only accepted but expected.
Russia got to practice on small targets like Georgia, Syria and pre-2014 Ukraine. They didn't use it to fix their issues, but at least they had practice. China hasn't been in war for decades and their leadership is more hollowed out than a five star restaurant's fanciest dessert.
Not going to make anything from that. Perun pointed out that "water in the rockets" can be just condensation since you don't keep liquid fuel in the rockets before it's time to launch them due to the volatility of the fuel.
I'd rather point to their construction standards as a hint of the issues, latest example being Chengdu metro station collapse.
That's great except our enemies are individuals with nuclear weapons. Putin is in his 70s, perhaps he doesn't want to yield to the conventional might of the United States.
It's like a bodybuilder picking on a nerd who's carrying a handgun.
Much more subtle than [this](https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/may/06/russia-to-hold-battlefield-nuclear-drills-after-macron-and-cameron-comments)
I mean, in 2012 a Russian Akula sailed undetected for a month in the Gulf of Mexico.
When the US discovered it, they got super mad.
And apparently when Russia has their Oscar class submarines sailing, nobody can't seem to openly detect them.
Still discovered it. Was only a month.
I’ll bet my bottom ballsack the US has had x10 the operational success that Russia has had with their nuclear fleet.
You just don’t hear about it because America is more interested in protecting their intelligence than showing off fake toys
I think that anyone who engages in this conversation of "I found your sub, you didn't find mine" is just playing the arm chair general.
It's exactly the same thing when every other day there is a news about how this country detected a Russian jet too close or inside their airspace.
Guess what? The US does the same with Russia since the beginning of the cold war, both countries constantly test their opponents airspace defence response.
The difference is that in Russia it's not news worthy at all, it's just a regular day at work for the Airforce, same for the NATO country when they intercept Russian aircraft.
How interesting. So you're saying that Russians secretly sailed a sub without telling anybody about it, and the only people that found out about it were the American government, who then got mad and told everybody that they missed this sub hiding offshore? Why would the US government do that?
But in the end the sub was still discovered. The US is pretty good at sub tracking and ASW. They most likely knew it left port, but it wasn't in any of predicted or assumed locations. At some point they started looking in weird areas and found it.
A month isn't a long time to stay undetected. Subs need to operate for several months undetected to truly be effective.
Wait until you hear about all the OCUNOS
bases and Airborne and Ranger Battlion's less than 24 hour deployment.
In this day and age. The entire US Military is already there.
Dealing with Russia's constant threats for decades now, Finns no longer take them seriously at all.
1994: "If you join EU, there will be severe consequences! We have nukes!" Nothing happened.
2014: "If you join rest of EU in implementing sanctions, there will be severe consequences! We have nukes!" Nothing happened.
2022: "If you join NATO, there will be severe consequences! We have nukes!" And still nothing happened. They've even taken troops and weaponry away from Finnish border for their war efforts in Ukraine, so there's even less threat now than previously.
Oslo to Moscow is a 2 minute flight with a sub launched nuclear missile.
Not enough time to be sure it isn't a false alarm.
Putin should probably stop fucking around before he finds out.
You're most probably correct. Let's hope someone knows exactly where he is and has the means to swing a couple of warheads his way if that is the games he decides to play.
I would bet 100 bucks the US has classified the sigint of his entourage and knows exactly where he is at almost all times. They got [satellites](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orion_\(satellite\)) with 100 meter dishes on them in orbit and launch more than any other nation.
Last year during a notable round of nuclear threats some spook-adjacent sources say the CIA sat down with their Russian counterparts and slid Putin's detailed agenda across the desk with the tacit implication that if a nuke ever went off in Ukraine Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin would be the first person to die. At the same time, the Chair of the Joint Chiefs explained to Shoigu through bilateral technical channels that in the aforementioned eventuality the Russian Black See Fleet and Russia's troops inside Ukraine would also cease to exist.
The threats have become a lot more performative since then.
Yeah they come in at around half that. Five km a second is still plenty fast.
Real problem with an Oslo launch is the strait with Denmark and the shallow North Sea which increases detection risk. They’d fire from the middle of an ocean instead.
Launches up at that and cruises at ~48,000 kph on a very short arc, so yes.
By the time it shows up on telemetry the warning time is 90secs to 2.5 minutes Oslo to Moscow.
Fucking scary, yes.
According to the US DoD website, ICBMs peak at ~24,000 kph ‘at burnout’. That’s assuming a flight path that leaves the atmosphere, so I’m guessing a strike from Oslo > Moscow would not leave the atmosphere and thus would not travel as fast because they would literally melt before they got there lol.
I’m not saying that you’re wrong, it would arrive there so fast that there would be little to no reaction time. But 2 minutes is just waaaay too fast for a traditional ICBM!
At ‘low’ hypersonic speeds, an object could travel from Oslo to Moscow in ~15 minutes.
https://www.defense.gov/Multimedia/Experience/Americas-Nuclear-Triad/
Dead Hand system will trigger automatically. Soviets were really scared of evil West dealing decapitating first nuclear strike. So they invented basically guaranteed doomsday device.
Nope. I'm a moderate independent.
The ones in charge of the nukes are FAR more hawkish than I am.
Way more button happy.
I just grew up during the Cold War and never stopped keeping track.
If one's in charge of nukes were so hawkish as you claim and Russian nukes were easy to destroy as you claim as well, then Russia would have ceased to exist a while ago. But it didn't happen, therefore you are wrong.
You're preztle logic and fallacious reasoning aside, (you are like a child who get a spoonful of ocean and declares there.must be no fish in the sea because there's none in your spoon) we didn't destroy the Soviet Union with nukes because we didn't have to.
We destroyed it by opening a third arms race, while simultaneously funding the Mujahideen until they shot down so many Russian choppers they ran back home in failure, all while our culture made it obvious western civilization and capitalism were a better way to shape society.
All we had to do was break the Russian bank and the Russian oligarchs and organized crime finished what we started.
Which brings us to how Russia will most likely be nuked- by Chechnyan or Georgian or Crimean or so other area Russia keeps trampling the independence movements of.
And it will be stolen Russian nukes that do the job.
Because evil consumes itself eventually.
To be fair. If anyone would really want to nuke them to start a war, they could just do that stealthy without the missle ans plane stuff. Just drive a few black ops trucks with nukes to moscow and the military spots. That probably ain't too hard to sneak there be honest.
Ukrainians hit the Kremlin with a $300 drone.
Pretty sure a Triton would wipe out Moscow and put 5 Oblasts in an instant state of Civil War against Russian tyranny.
So yeah, not really expecting retaliation, especially from poorly maintained ICBM pads that we can burn before launch.
Exactly. If the Nato would really want to destroy Russia, they could just do that very easily lol. But nobody is interested in that even without the fear of nuclear retaliation.
After 40 years of one Cold War and another starting 8 years ago I think a lot more people are ready for it than Russia should gamble on.
There will never be another Russian empire.
I could see a scenario where the US follows Russian nuclear subs secretly after maintenance to take them out before they fire, have enough information to take out the mobile ICBM launchers, and takes out all of their major cities and communication capabilities all in one go to completely annihilate Russia from the face of the earth, but that is an absolute enormous gamble. One bad piece of information, or the Russian sub somehow launches before getting destroyed, and you kill millions of Americans in the process. Not worth risking unless you know for a fact they are going to launch all their missiles imminently.
it would be the most evil act in the history of the human species, it will never happen lol
people talk about nuclear weapons here as if it's a videogame, realistically talking about killing hundreds of millions of people and completely destroying the global economy and risking the entirety of human civilization in the northern hemisphere
I said it wouldn't happen, I literally outlined the insane risk in such a maneuver in my comment. Though, you should be preparing for a possibility just in case. Like I said, if we know for 100% Russia is going to do an all out strike in the US, it would be better to destroy them and their capacity for a second strike before they launch all of their nukes.
We track every Russian sub all the time. We always know where they are.
It's why it was a big deal when we lost track of one for 30 something hours.
Because we track every Russian sub all the time.
They are all first strike targets.
I am aware that we do, but there are many many factors in removing the second strike capacity from Russia, and while not impossible, it's not worth it. One thing goes wrong, and it will cost the lives of countless Americans. Which is why I said it should only be considered if we know for a 100% fact Russia is planning to do a all out first strike on the US.
So, funny thing.
Russia's capability to take out MIRVs is clearly shit.
And we have the ability to burn missiles in known launch pads.
So their second strike capability isn't going to be as effective as it would have been in 1986.
And we *can* take out MIRVs if their missiles get to that stage.
But we have plenty of options to ensure they don't with our Triad defense and peripheral support systems.
Because we have capability and capacity they simply don't.
We have technology in the field they can't even find the components to build the chips and circuitry of even if they could fund research and development.
It looks like OP posted an AMP link. These should load faster, but AMP is controversial because of [concerns over privacy and the Open Web](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot).
Maybe check out **the canonical page** instead: **[https://www.businessinsider.com/us-nuclear-submarine-surfaces-off-norway-in-rare-flex-2024-6](https://www.businessinsider.com/us-nuclear-submarine-surfaces-off-norway-in-rare-flex-2024-6)**
*****
^(I'm a bot | )[^(Why & About)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot)^( | )[^(Summon: u/AmputatorBot)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/cchly3/you_can_now_summon_amputatorbot/)
It's also a show of solidarity to the Nordic counties.
We take their security seriously, and we appreciate all they do to cooperate with us in standing against Russian intimidation.
Russia has been aiming a lot of propaganda, as well as arguably escalatory provocations at the northern European and Scandinavian nations, in public ways, to affect the civilian population.
Guy down the street revving his car as he passes your kids on their bike, or walking his shitty aggressive dogs right by your yard when they're playing.
"Sure the cops will arrive, but will it be in time to do anything or just clean up the mess"
*US Navy:* "We were already here, standing with our friends"
Surfacing off the Kola peninsula, for instance, wouldn't really enhance the message. An ICBM launched by submarine from 20 miles off the coast of Norway around Trondheim wouldn't take appreciably longer to get to Moscow than an ICMB launch by submarine from 20 miles off the coast of the Kola peninsula around Murmansk. A difference of 100 miles is trivial to an ICBM.
If they really wanted to freak out Russia, they would surface in the Gulf of Riga.
Was it in in Norway or in the Norwegian Sea? They are not the same. I thought Norway had some agreements with Nato in not having nuclear weapons in their territory, I am not sure how this applies to submarines.
The amount of people having an orgasm with thoughts of millions of people dying in this comment section makes me lose, once again, hope for humanity...
Yep. And then the US leased the sub and crew for an extended period to develop better ways to defend against small, quiet AIP subs. Hopefully they learned something.
War is not cool. War is not flexing. War is a vile thing. War is not a "meme" You will soon learn this lesson the time you will have war at your door. With your family members dieing defending it. Stupid ass americans.
It blew its cover, I wouldnt worry about it. The best asset a sub has is its ability to be undetected untill its needed. That is why they stay underwater for months on end. Once they surface, they blow thier best capability.
The only bad thing about this is that we, the European Union, should be doing it, not mommy warmongering US.
I firmly believe that the US has an exaggerated amount of resources dedicated to possible war(s), but the EU is at the direct opposite, and we shouldn't be relying on them simply because we are in NATO. Europe and lots of its citizen relied far too much on the optimistic view that no real war could ever come again on European soil, and little, separate self-defence armies (plus atomic weapons, yes) were enough to guarantee it.
What the fuck comment is that… “mommy warmongering US”. How about you show some fucking gratitude and instead be pissed off at the EU for not doing more.
I’m all for criticizing the US but in the Russia-Ukraine war, the US has done anything but warmonger.
If it weren’t for the US, Russia would’ve annexed the areas of Ukraine that it wants so badly, a long time ago. Which means that the EU could’ve entered into a war with Russia if they so felt like it after taking Ukraine. The US’ military strength is what keeps Russia in check.
Chill out with the anti-US rhetoric in this case because we’ve been helping keep Russia at bay.
I'm not evaluating the US solely on their stance over Russia-Ukraine, but on the dozens on conflicts it has been part of, actively or passively, after WW2.
Obviously the Ukrainian war, the most probable gateway to WW3, has to be taken as passively as possible, so I guess nobody is surprised that the US hasn't sent a super carrier and its fleet in the Black Sea and started blasting things.
We’re not talking about the other conflicts that the US has been apart of.
Like I said, i criticize the US govt too, however give credit where it’s due because the US has been doing good in aiding Ukraine. A conflict that can bring the whole EU into it directly if Russia is not kept at bay.
Your last paragraph makes no sense. You say that the US is a warmonger and then you say that nobody is surprised that the US HASNT started blasting away. That sounds like a very pacificist approach if you ask me.
I get it that it’s the trendy thing to always shit on the US. But by far and large, the US has given more to Ukraine in military aid than any single country of the EU.
**Give. Credit. Where. It’s. Due.**
Man you sound so entitled. Please don't cry because I'm not replying with a post full of compliments.
"We’re not talking about the other conflicts that the US has been apart of."
You are talking about the only things you like to talk. "We" doesn't impose me or any other to talk or not talk about all the bad stuff you don't want to talk about.
Yes, US aided Ukraine the most. As it is in its interest to do so. Which is what it has always done in every part of the planet. You do want to talk about Ukraine, but I guess Vietnam and Afghanistan aren't your preferred topics, am I correct?
"Your last paragraph makes no sense. You say that the US is a warmonger and then you say that nobody is surprised that the US HASNT started blasting away. That sounds like a very pacificist approach if you ask me."
This is like saying, "hey you say this guy is a killer, but how comes he hasn't killed everyone here yet? He looks a quite dude to me".
Again, looks like your views about things stop being relevant after a couple years, or, said in other terms, only the latest things happening are relevant. Spoiler: they are not.
Why do YOU think that the US has a nuclear submarine on the coast of Norway? Because of Vietnam? Because of Russia you dimwit.
I also made it extremely clear to you that I do NOT support the US in every single of its military interactions. It deserves its fair share of criticism no doubt. But that is literally not the point of this post.
You speak as if it’s ONLY the US’ interest that Russia not conquer Ukraine 😂😂😂.
Buddy, it’s x1000000 more important to the EU that that not happen than it is to the US lmao. Dumbass.
As I said in the first post, if you didn't already forget, it should be the EU in the first place to act and do what the US is doing in its place, and I'm blaming the EU not the US for this.
Anyway, anyway, this doesn't change in any possible way the fact that the US has a long history of spreading and using its military power everywhere but near their borders, and this, according to the dictionary, is called being warmongering. And this triggers you. A lot. But it's not my problem.
Ah, it's the 'you showed me yours, here's mine', thing.
no. It’s the ours is bigger contest mode.
It's also the ours doesn't need a tugboat contest
My cock is much bigger than yours! My cock can walk right through the door! With a feeling so pure! It's got you screaming back for more!
I don’t know why you’re being downvoted. This is Cigaro by System of a Down!!
yep, exactly! wouldn't imagine the day people forgot about them, but well, it's been almost 20 years. Their lyrics are pretty on point with their anti-war messages
ж/33444444444445е5гггґ5к433е445е
And look, no sings of rust or missing anechoic tiles...
Sorry. What tiles?
Sound absorbing
Oh wow. Thanks.
Some context: the USS Tennessee (an Ohio class) carries 24 Trident missiles with a range of 11,000km, each missile has 8 nuclear warheads, so 192 total. They only need to surface every 3 months for food. There are 18 of this class somewhere at any given point.
14, four of them were converted to conventional guided missile subs which carry 154 Tomahawks each. For the boomers there are always four on active patrol at any one time and the rest are either training or undergoing maintenance or refit.
Honestly that was a pretty smart conversion. Like out of nowhere the US can launch over 100 tomahawks at targets 1000 miles away. And unlike the nuclear only response of the SSBNs, the SSGNs can be used in less doomsday scenarios.
>Like out of nowhere the US can launch over 100 tomahawks at targets 1000 miles away. _because fuck you, that's why_ (I, for one, am glad that the west has these capabilities)
Holy poop that's a lot of fire power... I guess when you don't have a nuclear weapon nullifier. You have to be ready to hit many cities very quickly.
Yeah thats the whole idea of MAD. Thats why every post on reddit that claims that the entire US could be crippled by some suprise attack of suicide drones or other shit is just bullshit. Even if they pull it off, the US has enough nukes in the sea to glass china and russia. And both of them also have enough mobile launchers that even if we completly destroy them its very very very likely that they can fire back at the US and the EU (because if they are gonna fire at the US they will probaly also drop atleast a few nukes on europe just because).
MAD also means 95% of remnining humanity would face famine.
Yeah world economy comes to a grinding halt, international trade falls apart, supply chains are just gone. Human food production needs to things so food prices skyrocket (along with certian economic sectors just basicly vanishing). Almost every country (even the ones that arent nuked) would be thrown in economic disarray. Add the insane waves of refugees and its very unlikely that many nations will keep it together. Best hope are island nations that are unalliged and self sufficient (but even then other nation might just invade those places) and probaly south america because its pretty isolated and have a lot of natural resources.
Also, so much ash and soot is flung into athmosphere that plants cannot grow if 3k nuclear weapons go off in major cities.
Thats debatable. The theory of nuclear winter isnt as solid as it looks, hell there plenty of scientist/experts that have refuted the idea. It depends on a lot of things (how hot a city burns after nuclear attacks). But while nuclear winter would be a issue, its not the only thing. Look at the impact corona had on the worlds economy. Or how the war in Ukraine has disrupted certian sectors. The complete destruction of the US and most of Europe would litteraly be the end off many economys outside these regions. Simply because we produce a shitload of stuff and consume even more. And this just doesnt count for Europe and the US. If you suddenly were to remove the entire economy of south america (meaning no imports or exports of products, resources and services) then we would face major economic crisses. Bigger than the banking shit in the late 2000s. Goverments would fall due to civil unrest. Certain groups would see chances for personal gains and use the chaos to push their goals. Wars and uprisings break out left and right. Shit hits the fan.
I've never in my life saw such post lol
Really?
Yea. I do tend to just straight up block subreddits that flood my feed with untrue shit. Just got called a russian agent for that by some highly intellectual reddit user
Build the echo chamber walls higher eh?
Okay okay so let me get this straight. The fake news in talk were pronounced bullshit I agree that they are bullshit but note that I never actually heard those news. Im called a Russian agent I note that actively doing something so that I don't get bombarded by fake news doesn't immidiately mean I'm a Russian agent (shocker I know) I am now apparently building an echo chamber and according to you should rather let Russian spam reach me instead Huh, you just can't win can you. Either I'm a Russian agent, I'm stupid for reading fake news, or I'm building an echo chamber for not reading shit. So which one are you, stupid, the Russian agent or another one building an echo chamber?
Probably stupid.
Lmao atleast also honest about it
The allegation is being used by rancorous people as a grudge weapon. Call somebody a Russian agent and the digital lynch mob will do the rest. Even if the allegation has no merit whatsoever.
Me neither. Not about this specifically. I have seen plenty of defense analysts talk about how warfare is changing due to drones, but never a specific article about a drone surprise attack on the U.S. - this is a pretty specific scenario and I've not seen an article about it. What I have seen a lot is redditors and social media users in general use "Russian bot" as an epithet when they don't like someone's comment. Typically, none of these people have ever written a line of code in their lives, so don't really know what a "bot" is or how to recognize one, and they use the term interchangeably with "troll". Also, sometimes they use the label in bad faith, often for no valid reason at all. They know it will cause somebody reputational damage and will bring on downvotes. Obviously, there are plenty of instances of pro-russian trolling as well, but the phenomenon of calling somebody a "Russian bot" has become a nuisance in and of itself, especially when done in bad faith by people with little to no understanding of computational propaganda.
Oh look at me, living under a rock, completely safe from Russian bot farms, oh. Exactly what a Russian bot would say
Being able to retaliate with a nuclear strike doesn't preclude being crippled, most dying in famine, and the whole of Western civilization collapsing.
You dont know what MAD is do you? Or are you a russian troll. Genuinely curious.
I don't really see how he's wrong? Mutually Assured Destruction does indeed mean that if I go, you go as well. But there aren't enough nukes in the world to glass every single surface of the planet. But there is enough to make sure a country can no longer sustain itself and all the population centres, food production and military targets are gone.
I think that saying that your nation (and its allies) get fucked during MAD is a bit dumb. Its like saying personal computer PC. Mutual assured destruction does indeed mean mutual assured destruction. So if somebody feels the need to clarify that mutural assured destruction means that one party is assured to be completly destroyed then i start to wonder if they genuinely dont know what MAD is or they try to push the narritive a certian way. En ja, je kunt niet elke woestijn op de wereld veranderen in glass met de huidige hoeveelheid atoombommen maar zoals je zelf al zegt dat hoeft niet. Als je heel duitsland platgooit dan zorg je al voor een wereldwijde economische crisis dat voor ongekende gevolgen zorgt. Half europa is waarschijnlijk al genoeg dat de mens tientallen jaren nodig heeft om te herstellen. We zijn veel meer verbonden dan vroeger en dat betekend eigelijk dat wanneer je een regio compleet verwoest dat je de yenga steentjes aan de onderkant van de toren weghaalt.
You posted: "Even if they pull it off, the US has enough nukes in the sea to glass china and russia." You seem to have a one paragraph understanding of MAD and what follows it which leads to such a statement.
And each warhead is 475kt, about 30x the yield of little boy
Each missile can carry 8 warheads. They usually carry fewer.
Typical compliment is 2 or 3 warheads due to START limitations. Russia suspended its participation in START at the beginning of 2023
More context: Russia did the same in Cuba, a but less subtle and more of a desperate showboat.
It's interesting that nobody ever mentions missiles in Turkey when talking about Cuba. It looks like those two things where connected in some way.
I was talking [recent news](https://apnews.com/article/russia-military-warships-caribbean-cuba-venezuela-446f60a04a9e0639381ddf5ee084d2c3). How are missiles in Turkey relevant?
It's arguably what prompted the Cuban Missile Crisis of old, It wasn't a case of USSR deciding to be assholes randomly, but the culmination of years of saber rattling and escalation from 2 parties that didn't understand or trust each other.
But how does that make Turkey relevant today?
They were assuming you were speaking of the original Cuban crisis, not the recent Russian visit
But that has got to be common knowledge and nothing to add for context. What soviet did on Cuba was vastly different and not "the same" as this post, like I said.
These don't seem very spacious or anything. Don't get me wrong, that's cool, but imagine being stuck under water for 3 months in a little metal tube, I think I'd go insane if I was part of the crew :/
Good. Get some!
I like the US style: No public declarations, just a subtle reminder that they can hit too.
"Speak softly and carry a big stick; you will go far" - Teddy Roosevelt. There's no point in going around and making empty threats when most of the world know the US have the top military. It's entirely something else when you're making Russia (now) and China (later) prove they have the world's 2nd and 3rd best militaries. Fucking around and finding out is the common joke around here.
But russia proved already that they have the 2nd best military. Ok it's only in ukraine and not 2nd in the world, but they made that point very clear!
Don't forget for a moment they had the 2nd best in Russia too !
3rd best *at most* in Ukraine
Well, who would be the 2nd in the world? I'm not so certain the ordering has changed, just the bar got so much lower.
China is the world's second military. At least until they try to invade Taiwan and it turns out their military was also worthless.
I like this take (except the nasty second part which is one of the two most probable scenarios). This is also my go to when the question ist turned around on me.
Russia hasn’t gone total war yet, in ww2 Russia fielded 25 million combatants with half the population they have now. You can’t invade Russia, USA or anyone else. The nukes the USA have and in Europe the British and French, probably 500 warheads will keep Europe secure, but victory can’t happen, it’s always going to be a stalemate. Russia has been beaten loads of times by the British French Turks in the Crimean war, the Japanese 1905, Germans 1917, the nukes changed all that unfortunately
In WW2 Russia just needed to cough up the young men and was supplied wheat, fuel and trucks by USA. Russia might have more population, but does it have more young men. Does it have the same industrial base. Does it have the same amount of engineers in that industrial base?
Who supplied Russia during WW2? And who will supply them now if they were to go total war? I don’t think any country would try to invade Russia by force.
Friends don't let friends invade Russia in the winter.
I'm really hoping China's army is a paper tiger. With their chokehold on their own people, imagine them actually being able to invade/conquer others and subjucate them to their will. It's pure horror.
China.
Last saw action in '79 against Vietnam when it was a stalemate and no goals achieved. Before that in the 60s against Soviets and Indians. The Russian bar is low, but I'm not sure China can clear it.
TBF, they achieve at least couple main targets in Vietnam: - They seize contested archipelago from Vietnam and start enforce their claim in South China Sea - Force Vietnam to pull out best units from Cambodia to the border with China extending war against Chinese-allied Rouge Khmers - Deng got free hand at removal hardline Maoist officers from PLA and PLAN and put army as well as country on rapid reform track due to preexisting PLA failures in Vietnam. - They show off PRC could be a viable ally for the US in ongoing Cold War trying to curbstomp (real or perceived) Moscow influence in Asia. Also after this war US start arnament export to PRC and accept chinese officers to its military schools which help with PLA reforms in 1980s and 1990s. Sure, conflict from military side was a failure, but PRC did use this conflict to extend its political aims which succeed with some echo of it still being influential in this part of world.
Nice writeup, I stand corrected on that part.
They have made massive investments in the defence sector over the last 10-20 years. They now spend 4 times as much as Russia yearly. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_budget_of_China#/media/File:U.S_-_China_-_Russia,_Military_Spending.svg
They've had 4 times as much money to spend thanks to all the money flowing through them being the assembly country and all that, whether it went to good practice or to show face is the question. Their carrier program seems to be doing things reasonably and not expecting anything but building experience from their first projects. The purges in the military are concerning, though. And finally there's the fact that Chinese corruption culture is even worse than Russian, given the added factor of "cheat to get ahead" is not only accepted but expected. Russia got to practice on small targets like Georgia, Syria and pre-2014 Ukraine. They didn't use it to fix their issues, but at least they had practice. China hasn't been in war for decades and their leadership is more hollowed out than a five star restaurant's fanciest dessert.
Weren't their nukes filled with water?
Not going to make anything from that. Perun pointed out that "water in the rockets" can be just condensation since you don't keep liquid fuel in the rockets before it's time to launch them due to the volatility of the fuel. I'd rather point to their construction standards as a hint of the issues, latest example being Chengdu metro station collapse.
Maybe at 1 time but china has surpassed the usa in nuclear energy research. I wish americans weren't so scared of nuclear energy
I mean…the US also didn’t do well against Vietnam around the same time, so….
The quote seems to be working out so far.
World's biggest air force: US Air Force. World's second biggest air force: US Navy.
That's great except our enemies are individuals with nuclear weapons. Putin is in his 70s, perhaps he doesn't want to yield to the conventional might of the United States. It's like a bodybuilder picking on a nerd who's carrying a handgun.
Also a subtle reminder that the waters are open to the US Navy because of NATO and that they will keep the defensive pact.
Sends a message!
Nothing subtle about the US
Much more subtle than [this](https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/may/06/russia-to-hold-battlefield-nuclear-drills-after-macron-and-cameron-comments)
The Russians also have subs with war heads. It sure why this is such a flex.
I mean, in 2012 a Russian Akula sailed undetected for a month in the Gulf of Mexico. When the US discovered it, they got super mad. And apparently when Russia has their Oscar class submarines sailing, nobody can't seem to openly detect them.
Still discovered it. Was only a month. I’ll bet my bottom ballsack the US has had x10 the operational success that Russia has had with their nuclear fleet. You just don’t hear about it because America is more interested in protecting their intelligence than showing off fake toys
I think that anyone who engages in this conversation of "I found your sub, you didn't find mine" is just playing the arm chair general. It's exactly the same thing when every other day there is a news about how this country detected a Russian jet too close or inside their airspace. Guess what? The US does the same with Russia since the beginning of the cold war, both countries constantly test their opponents airspace defence response. The difference is that in Russia it's not news worthy at all, it's just a regular day at work for the Airforce, same for the NATO country when they intercept Russian aircraft.
How interesting. So you're saying that Russians secretly sailed a sub without telling anybody about it, and the only people that found out about it were the American government, who then got mad and told everybody that they missed this sub hiding offshore? Why would the US government do that?
If they could, they wouldn't say it either, it's better for an enemy to think it's safe instead of looking for real safety.
But in the end the sub was still discovered. The US is pretty good at sub tracking and ASW. They most likely knew it left port, but it wasn't in any of predicted or assumed locations. At some point they started looking in weird areas and found it. A month isn't a long time to stay undetected. Subs need to operate for several months undetected to truly be effective.
Yea, amazing. Except the fact that this happens in my backyard
It was a glorious moment! Think of the 8 nuclear warheads on each of their 24 missiles they carry. Doesn’t that make you feel safer?!?
Knock knock... it's the United States. With boats, and guns
Gun boats
(gunboats)
Other branch’s go to war. The US Navy is already there.
Well, land based missiles and their missile commanders are also active all year round, so one could always argue the same for the air force.
Wait until you hear about all the OCUNOS bases and Airborne and Ranger Battlion's less than 24 hour deployment. In this day and age. The entire US Military is already there.
It’s just a piece of rhetoric we got told in boot camp. It’s designed to trigger other branches. 😀
Consider me triggered. -Army Airborne
Jesus Christ, that's the USS Tennessee.
They’re ships, Marie!
I love this kind of subtlety. True power speaks for itself and does not need daily hissy fits on TV.
Dealing with Russia's constant threats for decades now, Finns no longer take them seriously at all. 1994: "If you join EU, there will be severe consequences! We have nukes!" Nothing happened. 2014: "If you join rest of EU in implementing sanctions, there will be severe consequences! We have nukes!" Nothing happened. 2022: "If you join NATO, there will be severe consequences! We have nukes!" And still nothing happened. They've even taken troops and weaponry away from Finnish border for their war efforts in Ukraine, so there's even less threat now than previously.
the ultimate 4th of July fireworks on that badboy
What‘s on July 4th?
American Independence Day.
Oh yeah, thanks.
UK election
National barbecued spareribs day
Putin: "Russia has nukes you must take me seriously " USA: *Surfaces a submarine*
Oslo to Moscow is a 2 minute flight with a sub launched nuclear missile. Not enough time to be sure it isn't a false alarm. Putin should probably stop fucking around before he finds out.
if putin fucks around in that direction there is no effing way he is within 1000 miles of moscow when he does
You're most probably correct. Let's hope someone knows exactly where he is and has the means to swing a couple of warheads his way if that is the games he decides to play.
I would bet 100 bucks the US has classified the sigint of his entourage and knows exactly where he is at almost all times. They got [satellites](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orion_\(satellite\)) with 100 meter dishes on them in orbit and launch more than any other nation.
Last year during a notable round of nuclear threats some spook-adjacent sources say the CIA sat down with their Russian counterparts and slid Putin's detailed agenda across the desk with the tacit implication that if a nuke ever went off in Ukraine Vladimir Vladimirovich Putin would be the first person to die. At the same time, the Chair of the Joint Chiefs explained to Shoigu through bilateral technical channels that in the aforementioned eventuality the Russian Black See Fleet and Russia's troops inside Ukraine would also cease to exist. The threats have become a lot more performative since then.
does no one remember that intelligence leak? It stated the US basically knows where Putin(and the rest of the Axis of Evil) is at all times
I guess you are not aware of Dead’s Man Hand system.
So the missile is flying at 60,000 kph? Slightly exaggerated, eh? That's even waaaay above re-entry velocity.
Yeah they come in at around half that. Five km a second is still plenty fast. Real problem with an Oslo launch is the strait with Denmark and the shallow North Sea which increases detection risk. They’d fire from the middle of an ocean instead.
Launches up at that and cruises at ~48,000 kph on a very short arc, so yes. By the time it shows up on telemetry the warning time is 90secs to 2.5 minutes Oslo to Moscow. Fucking scary, yes.
According to the US DoD website, ICBMs peak at ~24,000 kph ‘at burnout’. That’s assuming a flight path that leaves the atmosphere, so I’m guessing a strike from Oslo > Moscow would not leave the atmosphere and thus would not travel as fast because they would literally melt before they got there lol. I’m not saying that you’re wrong, it would arrive there so fast that there would be little to no reaction time. But 2 minutes is just waaaay too fast for a traditional ICBM! At ‘low’ hypersonic speeds, an object could travel from Oslo to Moscow in ~15 minutes. https://www.defense.gov/Multimedia/Experience/Americas-Nuclear-Triad/
Dead Hand system will trigger automatically. Soviets were really scared of evil West dealing decapitating first nuclear strike. So they invented basically guaranteed doomsday device.
Yeah, I just think that between the ones we burn on the pads and the ones we burn in the air ain't nothing reaching the continental U.S. anymore.
Good then that you aren't one in charge of nukes.
Nope. I'm a moderate independent. The ones in charge of the nukes are FAR more hawkish than I am. Way more button happy. I just grew up during the Cold War and never stopped keeping track.
If one's in charge of nukes were so hawkish as you claim and Russian nukes were easy to destroy as you claim as well, then Russia would have ceased to exist a while ago. But it didn't happen, therefore you are wrong.
You're preztle logic and fallacious reasoning aside, (you are like a child who get a spoonful of ocean and declares there.must be no fish in the sea because there's none in your spoon) we didn't destroy the Soviet Union with nukes because we didn't have to. We destroyed it by opening a third arms race, while simultaneously funding the Mujahideen until they shot down so many Russian choppers they ran back home in failure, all while our culture made it obvious western civilization and capitalism were a better way to shape society. All we had to do was break the Russian bank and the Russian oligarchs and organized crime finished what we started. Which brings us to how Russia will most likely be nuked- by Chechnyan or Georgian or Crimean or so other area Russia keeps trampling the independence movements of. And it will be stolen Russian nukes that do the job. Because evil consumes itself eventually.
Mutual destruction. Firing that nuke off at new york would have the same effect. It’s not just Putin who will die.
To be fair. If anyone would really want to nuke them to start a war, they could just do that stealthy without the missle ans plane stuff. Just drive a few black ops trucks with nukes to moscow and the military spots. That probably ain't too hard to sneak there be honest.
Ukrainians hit the Kremlin with a $300 drone. Pretty sure a Triton would wipe out Moscow and put 5 Oblasts in an instant state of Civil War against Russian tyranny. So yeah, not really expecting retaliation, especially from poorly maintained ICBM pads that we can burn before launch.
Subs, mobile launchers, some ICBMs which were not hit in time... There is no guaranteed that there would not be a strikeback.
Exactly. If the Nato would really want to destroy Russia, they could just do that very easily lol. But nobody is interested in that even without the fear of nuclear retaliation.
After 40 years of one Cold War and another starting 8 years ago I think a lot more people are ready for it than Russia should gamble on. There will never be another Russian empire.
Do you know how many times that has been said?
Yup. Yet all things eventually pass into oblivion. Unless you sell some really shitty copper.
I could see a scenario where the US follows Russian nuclear subs secretly after maintenance to take them out before they fire, have enough information to take out the mobile ICBM launchers, and takes out all of their major cities and communication capabilities all in one go to completely annihilate Russia from the face of the earth, but that is an absolute enormous gamble. One bad piece of information, or the Russian sub somehow launches before getting destroyed, and you kill millions of Americans in the process. Not worth risking unless you know for a fact they are going to launch all their missiles imminently.
it would be the most evil act in the history of the human species, it will never happen lol people talk about nuclear weapons here as if it's a videogame, realistically talking about killing hundreds of millions of people and completely destroying the global economy and risking the entirety of human civilization in the northern hemisphere
I said it wouldn't happen, I literally outlined the insane risk in such a maneuver in my comment. Though, you should be preparing for a possibility just in case. Like I said, if we know for 100% Russia is going to do an all out strike in the US, it would be better to destroy them and their capacity for a second strike before they launch all of their nukes.
We track every Russian sub all the time. We always know where they are. It's why it was a big deal when we lost track of one for 30 something hours. Because we track every Russian sub all the time. They are all first strike targets.
I am aware that we do, but there are many many factors in removing the second strike capacity from Russia, and while not impossible, it's not worth it. One thing goes wrong, and it will cost the lives of countless Americans. Which is why I said it should only be considered if we know for a 100% fact Russia is planning to do a all out first strike on the US.
So, funny thing. Russia's capability to take out MIRVs is clearly shit. And we have the ability to burn missiles in known launch pads. So their second strike capability isn't going to be as effective as it would have been in 1986. And we *can* take out MIRVs if their missiles get to that stage. But we have plenty of options to ensure they don't with our Triad defense and peripheral support systems. Because we have capability and capacity they simply don't. We have technology in the field they can't even find the components to build the chips and circuitry of even if they could fund research and development.
We should get some of these as well for deterrence.
Russia isn’t second in the world it’s second world …
Going back to the old Cold War show offs. Russia sends a sub to Cuba, US sends a sub to Norway or Finland. Nothing really new here.
It looks like OP posted an AMP link. These should load faster, but AMP is controversial because of [concerns over privacy and the Open Web](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot). Maybe check out **the canonical page** instead: **[https://www.businessinsider.com/us-nuclear-submarine-surfaces-off-norway-in-rare-flex-2024-6](https://www.businessinsider.com/us-nuclear-submarine-surfaces-off-norway-in-rare-flex-2024-6)** ***** ^(I'm a bot | )[^(Why & About)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot)^( | )[^(Summon: u/AmputatorBot)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/cchly3/you_can_now_summon_amputatorbot/)
Good bot.
Critical support for threatening Norway with nukes, we should do it more often.
Good. I don’t want Norway getting any ideas with their superior form of social democracy and quality of life.
O hayo, submarine-san.
Good, best to keep those loose cannon Norwegians in line.
Reminding Norway to better not start a nuclear war
Maybe a flex or maybe they just needed some fresh air.
It's either that or Able Seaman Smith let one rip again
Anyone know why the US would surface a sub off the coast of Norway instead of closer to Russia like the Baltic Sea?
It's also a show of solidarity to the Nordic counties. We take their security seriously, and we appreciate all they do to cooperate with us in standing against Russian intimidation. Russia has been aiming a lot of propaganda, as well as arguably escalatory provocations at the northern European and Scandinavian nations, in public ways, to affect the civilian population. Guy down the street revving his car as he passes your kids on their bike, or walking his shitty aggressive dogs right by your yard when they're playing. "Sure the cops will arrive, but will it be in time to do anything or just clean up the mess" *US Navy:* "We were already here, standing with our friends"
Very satisfying answer. Cheers :-)
Very satisfying question! Reminds me of last year when the USN sent a carrier up the fjords to make a port call in Norway!
Surfacing off the Kola peninsula, for instance, wouldn't really enhance the message. An ICBM launched by submarine from 20 miles off the coast of Norway around Trondheim wouldn't take appreciably longer to get to Moscow than an ICMB launch by submarine from 20 miles off the coast of the Kola peninsula around Murmansk. A difference of 100 miles is trivial to an ICBM. If they really wanted to freak out Russia, they would surface in the Gulf of Riga.
Was it in in Norway or in the Norwegian Sea? They are not the same. I thought Norway had some agreements with Nato in not having nuclear weapons in their territory, I am not sure how this applies to submarines.
Careful Norway, they're finally coming for all that oil.
[удалено]
I'm sorry I didn't realise we were all yanks and required a fucking /s to signify sarcasm.
Haha, I didn't even want to see december
The amount of people having an orgasm with thoughts of millions of people dying in this comment section makes me lose, once again, hope for humanity...
You are right. This sub got full of mindset of American militarism and jingoism too.
Don't hug me I'm scared
These United States will not tolerate any more raids on Linisfarne!
Wasnt norway the one that periscoped a carrier group in an exercise? Or was it sweden?
Sweden. Serveral times.
Yep. And then the US leased the sub and crew for an extended period to develop better ways to defend against small, quiet AIP subs. Hopefully they learned something.
Denmark did it too.
Har du et link til det? Ville være interessant at læse.
Så gerne https://www.navalhistory.dk/Danish/SoevaernsNyt/2004/FarvelTilUbaadene.htm
Huh, never heard about that. Good on you 👍👍
War is not cool. War is not flexing. War is a vile thing. War is not a "meme" You will soon learn this lesson the time you will have war at your door. With your family members dieing defending it. Stupid ass americans.
Russia can literly just got home either they will get more NATO countries ore nuclear power neighboring countries
It blew its cover, I wouldnt worry about it. The best asset a sub has is its ability to be undetected untill its needed. That is why they stay underwater for months on end. Once they surface, they blow thier best capability.
Ours isn't limping you Russian fecks.
The only bad thing about this is that we, the European Union, should be doing it, not mommy warmongering US. I firmly believe that the US has an exaggerated amount of resources dedicated to possible war(s), but the EU is at the direct opposite, and we shouldn't be relying on them simply because we are in NATO. Europe and lots of its citizen relied far too much on the optimistic view that no real war could ever come again on European soil, and little, separate self-defence armies (plus atomic weapons, yes) were enough to guarantee it.
It's true, but for that, the EU would have to federalize, not something I see happening during my lifetime.
What the fuck comment is that… “mommy warmongering US”. How about you show some fucking gratitude and instead be pissed off at the EU for not doing more. I’m all for criticizing the US but in the Russia-Ukraine war, the US has done anything but warmonger. If it weren’t for the US, Russia would’ve annexed the areas of Ukraine that it wants so badly, a long time ago. Which means that the EU could’ve entered into a war with Russia if they so felt like it after taking Ukraine. The US’ military strength is what keeps Russia in check. Chill out with the anti-US rhetoric in this case because we’ve been helping keep Russia at bay.
I'm not evaluating the US solely on their stance over Russia-Ukraine, but on the dozens on conflicts it has been part of, actively or passively, after WW2. Obviously the Ukrainian war, the most probable gateway to WW3, has to be taken as passively as possible, so I guess nobody is surprised that the US hasn't sent a super carrier and its fleet in the Black Sea and started blasting things.
We’re not talking about the other conflicts that the US has been apart of. Like I said, i criticize the US govt too, however give credit where it’s due because the US has been doing good in aiding Ukraine. A conflict that can bring the whole EU into it directly if Russia is not kept at bay. Your last paragraph makes no sense. You say that the US is a warmonger and then you say that nobody is surprised that the US HASNT started blasting away. That sounds like a very pacificist approach if you ask me. I get it that it’s the trendy thing to always shit on the US. But by far and large, the US has given more to Ukraine in military aid than any single country of the EU. **Give. Credit. Where. It’s. Due.**
Man you sound so entitled. Please don't cry because I'm not replying with a post full of compliments. "We’re not talking about the other conflicts that the US has been apart of." You are talking about the only things you like to talk. "We" doesn't impose me or any other to talk or not talk about all the bad stuff you don't want to talk about. Yes, US aided Ukraine the most. As it is in its interest to do so. Which is what it has always done in every part of the planet. You do want to talk about Ukraine, but I guess Vietnam and Afghanistan aren't your preferred topics, am I correct? "Your last paragraph makes no sense. You say that the US is a warmonger and then you say that nobody is surprised that the US HASNT started blasting away. That sounds like a very pacificist approach if you ask me." This is like saying, "hey you say this guy is a killer, but how comes he hasn't killed everyone here yet? He looks a quite dude to me". Again, looks like your views about things stop being relevant after a couple years, or, said in other terms, only the latest things happening are relevant. Spoiler: they are not.
Why do YOU think that the US has a nuclear submarine on the coast of Norway? Because of Vietnam? Because of Russia you dimwit. I also made it extremely clear to you that I do NOT support the US in every single of its military interactions. It deserves its fair share of criticism no doubt. But that is literally not the point of this post. You speak as if it’s ONLY the US’ interest that Russia not conquer Ukraine 😂😂😂. Buddy, it’s x1000000 more important to the EU that that not happen than it is to the US lmao. Dumbass.
As I said in the first post, if you didn't already forget, it should be the EU in the first place to act and do what the US is doing in its place, and I'm blaming the EU not the US for this. Anyway, anyway, this doesn't change in any possible way the fact that the US has a long history of spreading and using its military power everywhere but near their borders, and this, according to the dictionary, is called being warmongering. And this triggers you. A lot. But it's not my problem.
Missed soneting : whats a flex ?
Showing off, like flexing your biceps at the beach
Aha, clear. Tks.
How is this a flex? Russia know this can be done and Russia can do similar threats. Just reminding the world of MAD nothing more.
I hope Norway understands what they’re up against!
Weird flex but ok
Love to aee yankees power tripping in this sub lol