Welcome to the Hardcore Husky Forums. Folks who are well-known in Cyberland and not that dumb.

What the fuck is next?

1…678911

Comments

  • RaceBannon
    RaceBannon Member, Moderator, Swaye's Wigwam Posts: 115,580 Founders Club
    AZDuck said:

    RaceBannon said:

    AZDuck said:

    RaceBannon said:

    GrundleStiltzkin said:

    YellowSnow said:

    UWhuskytskeet said:

    YellowSnow said:

    RaceBannon said:

    @AZDuck

    The point on Israel or us? in Iraq is that the good guys lose by being good guys. FDR had the luxury of complete censorship as we did our part in the death of 50 million people or so to get rid of Hitler and Tojo

    That's why I am now anti war because we will do what we did in Iraq. Kick their ass in 15 minutes then give it all back over the next years. Israel has the same issues. But to think Hamas can kick anyone's ass is retarded. And it shows your bias

    Chinterestingly enough, in spite of Little Man/Fat Boy, Tokyo, Dresden, et al, The US only accounted for a relatively small fraction of the 50 to 75 million killed in WWII. That body count was almost entirely Japanese killing Chinese, Soviets killing Germans (and whoever else Stalin wanted shot), and Germans killing everyone east of the Molotov - Ribbentrop line. Hell, RAF bomber command actually killed more kraut civilians than the USAAF did.
    Pretty sure the Bombing of Tokyo had about the same number of deaths as Little Man/Fat Boy. Today's nukes are literally 1000x more powerful, so results would be a little different now.
    Correct, but not so much my point here. Just random fun facting that most the death and destruction of WWII was not in fact inflicted by America in spite our overwhelming industrial might. The one good things about nukes to date is that except for a few close calls MAD tends to prevent world wars. Who knows if that will continue to be the case...
    Read this book last year. You probably mean chintentional use, but the number of accidents is astoundingly high.
    image
    We? lost a silo in Arkansas. Not sure if that is what the book is about.

    I agree with Yellow though - the A bomb was nothing special in regards to killing and MAD has been a big part of the kind of peace since WW2. Never meant to imply that we killed the 50 million.

    The point is there was a training exercise for D Day that killed thousands 749. And CNN video of Normandy would have ended the war on the spot.
    Does it count as a training exercise if ze Germans attack in the middle of it?
    Are you disagreeing with my point?
    Sort of. War is a blunt instrument. So if your poont is that once we declare war, we take off the proverbial gloves, I can see where you're coming from - even if I don't 100% agree.

    The big world wars of the 20th century were wars of survival - and they were brutal as fuck, and there wasn't really much in the way of "rules of engagement."

    That sickened so many people that they revised the Geneva Conventions in 1949. US and NATO ROE are based on our adherence to those revisions.

    We're not fighting wars of national survival right now. We're fighting expeditionary, for lack of a better term, imperial wars. So the rules are a little different as are the desired end-states.
    My point was video killed the war hero

    I was there when Vietnam was in our living room every night

    D Day was a horror even at the time and if it was shown we would wonder in a hurry if Europe was worth it.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • BearsWiin
    BearsWiin Member Posts: 5,076
    GrundleStiltzkin said:

    BearsWiin said:

    Jesus Christ people, PALs have been an effective part of negative control of nukes since forever. A missile malfunction or bomber crash isn't a fucking close call.

    Define 'forever'. I don't have the book in front of me, but as I recall from it, PALs weren't widespread and active to surprisingly late in the game. We? got very lucky on multiple occasions.
    Just about as early as we've had nukes. Primitive in the beginning, yes, but still effective for negative control. Nukes don't detonate if they're in a fire or accidentally dropped. It's not how they work.

    The serious close calls have been with warning systems giving false positives on potential attacks, forcing decisionmakers to shit bricks.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Pitchfork51
    Pitchfork51 Member Posts: 27,681
    The only good thing about total war would be that we would completely eliminate liberal pussies.

    Hard to cry about white privilege and other shit when you're getting shot at.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • AZDuck
    AZDuck Member Posts: 15,381
    BearsWiin said:

    Jesus Christ people, PALs have been an effective part of negative control of nukes since forever. A missile malfunction or bomber crash isn't a fucking close call.

    You're right, but not because of PALs. PALs were only really brought into use in the 1970's or so. Nukes are actually pretty hard to initiate. One of the render-safe procedures for certain nuclear ordnance used by the US in the 1970's and 1980's was to attach a shaped charge to a pre-marked point on the exterior of the ordnance in question and light her up. This had the effect of deflagrating the HE inside the casing.

    It takes a hell of a lot of energy to spin up the reaction in an atomic bomb and that energy is often attained by the detonation of high explosives within the warhead. But most HE is pretty hard to piss off as well. You can fire a bullet into a brick of C4 and it won't do anything (usually). You can also set fire to C4 and use it to cook. Just don't set the pan down too hard on the residue - because that shit is pissed off.

    So if the fuze to initiate the conventional HE isn't present, it is very unlikely that the HE will detonate, let alone the nuke.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Pitchfork51
    Pitchfork51 Member Posts: 27,681
    RaceBannon said:

    AZDuck said:

    RaceBannon said:

    AZDuck said:

    RaceBannon said:

    GrundleStiltzkin said:

    YellowSnow said:

    UWhuskytskeet said:

    YellowSnow said:

    RaceBannon said:

    @AZDuck

    The point on Israel or us? in Iraq is that the good guys lose by being good guys. FDR had the luxury of complete censorship as we did our part in the death of 50 million people or so to get rid of Hitler and Tojo

    That's why I am now anti war because we will do what we did in Iraq. Kick their ass in 15 minutes then give it all back over the next years. Israel has the same issues. But to think Hamas can kick anyone's ass is retarded. And it shows your bias

    Chinterestingly enough, in spite of Little Man/Fat Boy, Tokyo, Dresden, et al, The US only accounted for a relatively small fraction of the 50 to 75 million killed in WWII. That body count was almost entirely Japanese killing Chinese, Soviets killing Germans (and whoever else Stalin wanted shot), and Germans killing everyone east of the Molotov - Ribbentrop line. Hell, RAF bomber command actually killed more kraut civilians than the USAAF did.
    Pretty sure the Bombing of Tokyo had about the same number of deaths as Little Man/Fat Boy. Today's nukes are literally 1000x more powerful, so results would be a little different now.
    Correct, but not so much my point here. Just random fun facting that most the death and destruction of WWII was not in fact inflicted by America in spite our overwhelming industrial might. The one good things about nukes to date is that except for a few close calls MAD tends to prevent world wars. Who knows if that will continue to be the case...
    Read this book last year. You probably mean chintentional use, but the number of accidents is astoundingly high.
    image
    We? lost a silo in Arkansas. Not sure if that is what the book is about.

    I agree with Yellow though - the A bomb was nothing special in regards to killing and MAD has been a big part of the kind of peace since WW2. Never meant to imply that we killed the 50 million.

    The point is there was a training exercise for D Day that killed thousands 749. And CNN video of Normandy would have ended the war on the spot.
    Does it count as a training exercise if ze Germans attack in the middle of it?
    Are you disagreeing with my point?
    Sort of. War is a blunt instrument. So if your poont is that once we declare war, we take off the proverbial gloves, I can see where you're coming from - even if I don't 100% agree.

    The big world wars of the 20th century were wars of survival - and they were brutal as fuck, and there wasn't really much in the way of "rules of engagement."

    That sickened so many people that they revised the Geneva Conventions in 1949. US and NATO ROE are based on our adherence to those revisions.

    We're not fighting wars of national survival right now. We're fighting expeditionary, for lack of a better term, imperial wars. So the rules are a little different as are the desired end-states.
    I was there when the Roman Empire fell
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • AZDuck
    AZDuck Member Posts: 15,381
    RaceBannon said:

    AZDuck said:

    RaceBannon said:

    AZDuck said:

    RaceBannon said:

    GrundleStiltzkin said:

    YellowSnow said:

    UWhuskytskeet said:

    YellowSnow said:

    RaceBannon said:

    @AZDuck

    The point on Israel or us? in Iraq is that the good guys lose by being good guys. FDR had the luxury of complete censorship as we did our part in the death of 50 million people or so to get rid of Hitler and Tojo

    That's why I am now anti war because we will do what we did in Iraq. Kick their ass in 15 minutes then give it all back over the next years. Israel has the same issues. But to think Hamas can kick anyone's ass is retarded. And it shows your bias

    Chinterestingly enough, in spite of Little Man/Fat Boy, Tokyo, Dresden, et al, The US only accounted for a relatively small fraction of the 50 to 75 million killed in WWII. That body count was almost entirely Japanese killing Chinese, Soviets killing Germans (and whoever else Stalin wanted shot), and Germans killing everyone east of the Molotov - Ribbentrop line. Hell, RAF bomber command actually killed more kraut civilians than the USAAF did.
    Pretty sure the Bombing of Tokyo had about the same number of deaths as Little Man/Fat Boy. Today's nukes are literally 1000x more powerful, so results would be a little different now.
    Correct, but not so much my point here. Just random fun facting that most the death and destruction of WWII was not in fact inflicted by America in spite our overwhelming industrial might. The one good things about nukes to date is that except for a few close calls MAD tends to prevent world wars. Who knows if that will continue to be the case...
    Read this book last year. You probably mean chintentional use, but the number of accidents is astoundingly high.
    image
    We? lost a silo in Arkansas. Not sure if that is what the book is about.

    I agree with Yellow though - the A bomb was nothing special in regards to killing and MAD has been a big part of the kind of peace since WW2. Never meant to imply that we killed the 50 million.

    The point is there was a training exercise for D Day that killed thousands 749. And CNN video of Normandy would have ended the war on the spot.
    Does it count as a training exercise if ze Germans attack in the middle of it?
    Are you disagreeing with my point?
    Sort of. War is a blunt instrument. So if your poont is that once we declare war, we take off the proverbial gloves, I can see where you're coming from - even if I don't 100% agree.

    The big world wars of the 20th century were wars of survival - and they were brutal as fuck, and there wasn't really much in the way of "rules of engagement."

    That sickened so many people that they revised the Geneva Conventions in 1949. US and NATO ROE are based on our adherence to those revisions.

    We're not fighting wars of national survival right now. We're fighting expeditionary, for lack of a better term, imperial wars. So the rules are a little different as are the desired end-states.
    My point was video killed the war hero

    I was there when Vietnam was in our living room every night

    D Day was a horror even at the time and if it was shown we would wonder in a hurry if Europe was worth it.
    Nobody sees the video from war now either. After Vietnam, the Pentagon got really touchy about how reporters got access to conflict zones and what they were able to see and where they were sent. Part of the reason Chelsea Manning did 7 years is because she revealed some of that shit (ironically, a reporter getting killed by a helicopter gunship, if I remember correctly).

    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Pitchfork51
    Pitchfork51 Member Posts: 27,681
    AZDuck said:

    RaceBannon said:

    AZDuck said:

    RaceBannon said:

    AZDuck said:

    RaceBannon said:

    GrundleStiltzkin said:

    YellowSnow said:

    UWhuskytskeet said:

    YellowSnow said:

    RaceBannon said:

    @AZDuck

    The point on Israel or us? in Iraq is that the good guys lose by being good guys. FDR had the luxury of complete censorship as we did our part in the death of 50 million people or so to get rid of Hitler and Tojo

    That's why I am now anti war because we will do what we did in Iraq. Kick their ass in 15 minutes then give it all back over the next years. Israel has the same issues. But to think Hamas can kick anyone's ass is retarded. And it shows your bias

    Chinterestingly enough, in spite of Little Man/Fat Boy, Tokyo, Dresden, et al, The US only accounted for a relatively small fraction of the 50 to 75 million killed in WWII. That body count was almost entirely Japanese killing Chinese, Soviets killing Germans (and whoever else Stalin wanted shot), and Germans killing everyone east of the Molotov - Ribbentrop line. Hell, RAF bomber command actually killed more kraut civilians than the USAAF did.
    Pretty sure the Bombing of Tokyo had about the same number of deaths as Little Man/Fat Boy. Today's nukes are literally 1000x more powerful, so results would be a little different now.
    Correct, but not so much my point here. Just random fun facting that most the death and destruction of WWII was not in fact inflicted by America in spite our overwhelming industrial might. The one good things about nukes to date is that except for a few close calls MAD tends to prevent world wars. Who knows if that will continue to be the case...
    Read this book last year. You probably mean chintentional use, but the number of accidents is astoundingly high.
    image
    We? lost a silo in Arkansas. Not sure if that is what the book is about.

    I agree with Yellow though - the A bomb was nothing special in regards to killing and MAD has been a big part of the kind of peace since WW2. Never meant to imply that we killed the 50 million.

    The point is there was a training exercise for D Day that killed thousands 749. And CNN video of Normandy would have ended the war on the spot.
    Does it count as a training exercise if ze Germans attack in the middle of it?
    Are you disagreeing with my point?
    Sort of. War is a blunt instrument. So if your poont is that once we declare war, we take off the proverbial gloves, I can see where you're coming from - even if I don't 100% agree.

    The big world wars of the 20th century were wars of survival - and they were brutal as fuck, and there wasn't really much in the way of "rules of engagement."

    That sickened so many people that they revised the Geneva Conventions in 1949. US and NATO ROE are based on our adherence to those revisions.

    We're not fighting wars of national survival right now. We're fighting expeditionary, for lack of a better term, imperial wars. So the rules are a little different as are the desired end-states.
    My point was video killed the war hero

    I was there when Vietnam was in our living room every night

    D Day was a horror even at the time and if it was shown we would wonder in a hurry if Europe was worth it.
    Nobody sees the video from war now either. After Vietnam, the Pentagon got really touchy about how reporters got access to conflict zones and what they were able to see and where they were sent. Part of the reason Chelsea Manning did 7 years is because she revealed some of that shit (ironically, a reporter getting killed by a helicopter gunship, if I remember correctly).

    Well fuck you for this.

    I looked up Chelsea Manning for wood or not and found out she has transformed into a dude.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • Kaepsknee
    Kaepsknee Member Posts: 14,919
    Pitchfork51 said:

    AZDuck said:

    RaceBannon said:

    AZDuck said:

    RaceBannon said:

    AZDuck said:

    RaceBannon said:

    GrundleStiltzkin said:

    YellowSnow said:

    UWhuskytskeet said:

    YellowSnow said:

    RaceBannon said:

    @AZDuck

    The point on Israel or us? in Iraq is that the good guys lose by being good guys. FDR had the luxury of complete censorship as we did our part in the death of 50 million people or so to get rid of Hitler and Tojo

    That's why I am now anti war because we will do what we did in Iraq. Kick their ass in 15 minutes then give it all back over the next years. Israel has the same issues. But to think Hamas can kick anyone's ass is retarded. And it shows your bias

    Chinterestingly enough, in spite of Little Man/Fat Boy, Tokyo, Dresden, et al, The US only accounted for a relatively small fraction of the 50 to 75 million killed in WWII. That body count was almost entirely Japanese killing Chinese, Soviets killing Germans (and whoever else Stalin wanted shot), and Germans killing everyone east of the Molotov - Ribbentrop line. Hell, RAF bomber command actually killed more kraut civilians than the USAAF did.
    Pretty sure the Bombing of Tokyo had about the same number of deaths as Little Man/Fat Boy. Today's nukes are literally 1000x more powerful, so results would be a little different now.
    Correct, but not so much my point here. Just random fun facting that most the death and destruction of WWII was not in fact inflicted by America in spite our overwhelming industrial might. The one good things about nukes to date is that except for a few close calls MAD tends to prevent world wars. Who knows if that will continue to be the case...
    Read this book last year. You probably mean chintentional use, but the number of accidents is astoundingly high.
    image
    We? lost a silo in Arkansas. Not sure if that is what the book is about.

    I agree with Yellow though - the A bomb was nothing special in regards to killing and MAD has been a big part of the kind of peace since WW2. Never meant to imply that we killed the 50 million.

    The point is there was a training exercise for D Day that killed thousands 749. And CNN video of Normandy would have ended the war on the spot.
    Does it count as a training exercise if ze Germans attack in the middle of it?
    Are you disagreeing with my point?
    Sort of. War is a blunt instrument. So if your poont is that once we declare war, we take off the proverbial gloves, I can see where you're coming from - even if I don't 100% agree.

    The big world wars of the 20th century were wars of survival - and they were brutal as fuck, and there wasn't really much in the way of "rules of engagement."

    That sickened so many people that they revised the Geneva Conventions in 1949. US and NATO ROE are based on our adherence to those revisions.

    We're not fighting wars of national survival right now. We're fighting expeditionary, for lack of a better term, imperial wars. So the rules are a little different as are the desired end-states.
    My point was video killed the war hero

    I was there when Vietnam was in our living room every night

    D Day was a horror even at the time and if it was shown we would wonder in a hurry if Europe was worth it.
    Nobody sees the video from war now either. After Vietnam, the Pentagon got really touchy about how reporters got access to conflict zones and what they were able to see and where they were sent. Part of the reason Chelsea Manning did 7 years is because she revealed some of that shit (ironically, a reporter getting killed by a helicopter gunship, if I remember correctly).

    Well fuck you for this.

    I looked up Chelsea Manning for wood or not and found out she has transformed into a dude.
    #profileincourage
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • BearsWiin
    BearsWiin Member Posts: 5,076
    AZDuck said:

    BearsWiin said:

    Jesus Christ people, PALs have been an effective part of negative control of nukes since forever. A missile malfunction or bomber crash isn't a fucking close call.

    You're right, but not because of PALs. PALs were only really brought into use in the 1970's or so. Nukes are actually pretty hard to initiate. One of the render-safe procedures for certain nuclear ordnance used by the US in the 1970's and 1980's was to attach a shaped charge to a pre-marked point on the exterior of the ordnance in question and light her up. This had the effect of deflagrating the HE inside the casing.

    It takes a hell of a lot of energy to spin up the reaction in an atomic bomb and that energy is often attained by the detonation of high explosives within the warhead. But most HE is pretty hard to piss off as well. You can fire a bullet into a brick of C4 and it won't do anything (usually). You can also set fire to C4 and use it to cook. Just don't set the pan down too hard on the residue - because that shit is pissed off.

    So if the fuze to initiate the conventional HE isn't present, it is very unlikely that the HE will detonate, let alone the nuke.
    It's mostly HE compression of a core that causes critical mass and thus fissile detonation; later generations used fission as a fusion trigger, since extremely high temperatures and pressures are required to start the process. Neutron reflection/capture techniques to speed up the fission and fusion processes, so that fuel is spent before the heat blows the core apart, have been some of the most closely guarded military secrets we keep.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter