[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/k/ - Weapons


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.


[Advertise on 4chan]


File: 25killstreak.jpg (82 KB, 976x549)
82 KB
82 KB JPG
Can't counterattack their territory because it's guarded with tactical nukes. Have to make sure never to bomb or look like you're going to bomb, any of their nukes or the operators will launch them. Can't take out all their bombers because they'll then have to use their air-launched nukes before they lose the delivery method. And every time you take out one of their subs you're gambling it's not a boomer and you provoke them into launching. I just don't see how such a war wouldn't escalate to nukes almost immediately, which makes arguing about whether we can beat the Russian Army or the PLA in a conventional battle redundant.
>>
>>65038761
Didn't the Ukies take kursk without getting nuked?
>>
>>65038771
The Ukrainians have never actually threatened any Russian nuclear weapons with conventional attack, although I do believe they got uncomfortably close to some tactical nuke launchers in Kursk. They're arguably extremely lucky they didn't get very far.
>>
>>65038777
You said in your first sentence that you can't counter attack because muh nukes. Turns out nukes are a meme. If you start chucking them, everyone starts chucking them.
>>
>>65038784
It's arguably a completely different context since Ukraine does not have nukes nor an air force, so they can't really threaten the Russian nuclear deterrent. The Russians don't want to break the taboo on only using nukes against other nuclear power unless they have to. But if they fought the US, say, they'd need to launch almost immediately. The longer they go without launching, the more subs they might lose, the more launchers might get taken out by airstrikes, etc, and you can't let the enemy take out your nukes before they get launched, that defeats the point.
>>
>>65038793
That only applies if you'd prefer to suffer complete annihilation (the worst form of defeat) to any other form of defeat. Which we know is not true of humans.
>>
>>65038810
If that's the case, you wasted your time even having a nukes. It's only a deterrent if you actually use it when attacked.
>>
>>65038819
That's why we tricked Russia into building so many of them it caused them to collapse without a single shot fired.
>>
>>65038777
they did attack their EW radars
not sure if they did any damage or if those radars fall under the detternce doctrine but it happened in 2023 i think
>>65038784
thats not how it works anon
all big four (i include japan too cause they have something like 40+tons of plutonium which gives them like 3000+ warheads ) exists to keep the rest of the smaller ones in check
they know that if one of them throw nukes nobody will retaliate because they also gonna get hit back and nobody wants to get hit by nukes thus detterence
>>65038793
funny enough they also were able to attack the tu 95s exactly because the russians adhere to the start treaty
i just assume from now on russia will just remove itself from any treaty that exist because it doesnt even do any good for them at all
>>
File: Operation Spiderweb.jpg (136 KB, 1200x399)
136 KB
136 KB JPG
>>65038777
A big chunk of Russian nuke delivery doesn't exist anymore
>>
File: be0.png (403 KB, 680x437)
403 KB
403 KB PNG
As of today ukraine and iran are fighting back against two nuclear power and they havent done more than strike civilians with conventional payloads.
Unless you think svery large explosion is a tactical nuke like the toroschizo
>>
>>65038899
>a big chunk

they use 10 in ukraine out of 50
4 got damaged and or destroyed

however they arent even the big boys on the nuclear triad
>>
>>65038916
a lot more than that were completely destroyed. the triad is not longer even intact.
>>
File: saaarmat.jpg (100 KB, 800x475)
100 KB
100 KB JPG
>>65038916
There's 2 less subs in the Black kiddie pool, fairly much all their surface cruise missile capability got sunk or is in hiding, their Moskva got sunk, they cannot replace their aircraft and on top of that... its not all good in the ground launched hood because Saarmat doesn't seem to work and a hypersanic TEL got blown up a few days ago in Crimea.
Every part of the triad is degraded
When you lose delivery systems, that's usually some time to worry
>>
>>65038761
>Does it even make sense to plan to fight a nuclear power with conventional forces?
Yeah. Ukraine. Taiwan. Iran. South Korea (which faces a danger from North Korea).

I mean you don't have a choice if a nuclear power decides to attack you. You want to raise the costs of the big guy attacking you as much as possible.
>>
File: 4432.png (452 KB, 757x594)
452 KB
452 KB PNG
>>65038771
>Didn't the Ukies take kursk
not really, no

they still had about 70km to go
>>
>>65038761
Google quote here:
"Upon gaining independence in 1991, Ukraine possessed the world's third-largest nuclear arsenal, inheriting roughly 1,700 warheads, 176 ICBMs, and 44 bombers from the collapsed Soviet Union."
They gave that up on the understanding that The West would protect them.
We suck at protecting.
>>
>>65038919
you got more videos than the 4 we saw being attacked?

i highly doubt it
>>65038936
eh ok good for you?in what universe russia will use their surface fleet to launch nuclear capable cruise missiles?
in fact in what universe any navy will do that?
you realise that lets say russia want to nuke usa they gonna have to reach at least 1000km from usa
thats one days trip being visible to anything
>because Saarmat doesn't seem to work
you seem to bet that because some tests didnt work out it means the rest are just as shit which is stupid to say the least
>and a hypersanic TEL got blown up a few days ago in Crimea.
what hypersonic TEL?
russia abandoned the research years ago they launch them from mig 31s and ships
unless you mean they destroyed an iskander launcher...
>>
>>65038761
>I just don't see how such a war wouldn't escalate to nukes almost immediately, which makes arguing about whether we can beat the Russian Army or the PLA in a conventional battle redundant.
Military clashes in the real world aren't an immediate escalation to defcon 1 all nukes go
>>
File: 1739316441317578.jpg (189 KB, 1114x724)
189 KB
189 KB JPG
>>65038777
they are wrecking the dictatorships lifeline industry like refineries and oil export terminals. Which is destabilizing the regime itself to the point that they need to crack down with the tyranny to feel "safe". Maybe its time to wrap your head around the fact that NOOK OOKING isn't some magic "I win" button and even the nuclear tyrants sort of get that

In muscovias case only point they would ever even consider using it is a desperation weapon when the only two cities that matter, pidorsburg and muscovia, are themselves under threat. They wont use them to defend imperial provinces like kursk nor vladivostoks when chinks come to collect their debts



[Advertise on 4chan]

Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.