How Many Nuclear Missiles Can the United States Intercept?
- Thread starter ☑︎#VoteDemocrat
- Start date
Vandelay
Life is absurd. Lean into it.
I still feel like they have some hidden weapon that neutralizes ICBMs. Even if you intercept, they still blow up. 700 billion a year for 50 years gotta buy some kinda game-changing shyt.
Voice of Reason
Veteran
Most of that budget is to pay for deployed forces on bases all over the world.
Vandelay
Life is absurd. Lean into it.
Yeah I know, and to maintain shyt.
It's wishful thinking. But I imagine that some kind of project had to have been out there. The START treaty stopped the Star Wars defense system, but I think we know the US doesn't always operate off of their word.
Gritsngravy
Superstar
Realistically, why would anyone deploy nukes you hurting yourself just as much as the people your trying to destroy, and for what because you don’t want another country to have more economical power than you, at some point humans(really inbred Europeans/brits) have to come to the realization that there are greater things to achieve than to fight over who has the most say in how the global economy is ran
null
...
Vandelay
Life is absurd. Lean into it.
people are not rational. some people just want to watch the world burn.
Strangely enough, lesson I learned from The Dark Knight (The Joker didn't care about money or power, he simply wanted anarchy) and eventually reading some of the atrocities in Vietnam or many wars in general once they go on too long. Not everyone is a rational actor. Some people are legit just crazy.
When you realize this, you won't put anything past anyone until you've had time to know what motivates them.
Hood Critic
The Power Circle
Best way to neutralize a nuke is a failed launch.
null
...
Vandelay
Life is absurd. Lean into it.
I bet they have something, but after WW2 and the Cold War, I am sure you need to be "IN" to understand the shyt that is available; like you need to be really in deep with no connections to Russia or China. Maybe it won't get all of them, but enough minimize damage.
We are the kings of destruction after all.
Vandelay
Life is absurd. Lean into it.
All the war games and hypothetical scenarios the pentagon generates, you can't keep going back to the secretary of defense or the commander and chief year after year and say "we got nothing for that".
if nothing else, the two things the US does culturally well is assign blame and hires someone who will get the job done, even if that job creates more problems than it solves. This same problem been around since the Cuban Missile crisis. There's no way they don't have something that's moderately effective. They just don't beat their chest about what they got like Russia, China, and North Korea do.
Hood Critic
The Power Circle
You don't build a weapon to counter a hypersonic missile, you "poison" the technology/information used to be build the hypersonic missile.
Vandelay
Life is absurd. Lean into it.
Perhaps, but what do you do after it's already been built?
Arguably this line of thinking is what created the present climate. Stuxnet destroyed Iran's nuclear program, but after that it was open season to do anything that didn't directly involve civilian casualties.
There really is no way to play things "militarily" to prevent military Escalation. For what's it worth, I think the US played it as best as they could given the circumstances with an even dose of military preponderance and economic bridge-building. Parts of this are chickens coming home to roost, after the Berlin Wall and Soviet Union collapsed I feel like there should've been a de-escalation of global military projection. Can you imagine if the military budget was cut in half and diverted to other programs back in 93...we probably would've made it to Mars like originally forecasted.
Now that we're reverting back to cold war predispositions I feel like they have to keep the same funding or more in place. The truly unpredictable thing that arose to me out of this is how trash Russia's military is. Decades of neglect and corruption got it to where it's at. My fear is all they have left are bombs. Which historically aren't the most accurate, but they circumvent with sheer explosive yield.
IIVI
Superstar
With all those cases of Chinese and Russian cyber espionage as well real-life espionage and other forms of data intercept, I'm confident those countries have enough intel knowing the capabilities of other countries around the world.
Pretty sure that's why many of these countries pop-off the way they do: they know no single country can stop their nuclear volleys. Especially now with hyper sonics and missiles that can literally go around the world.
Countries who are more offensive-minded and spend more on research have a significant advantage because they're bound to find exploits and new tech the more defensive-minded countries never can predict.
Bottom line, nobody is stopping shyt once the nukes start flying. In this day and age, a single nuke flies and detonates for war usage and that means we're all done. It won't only be nuclear either: chemical weapons get dispatched and the atmosphere will pick those up and start spreading them in the water/wind.
Pretty sure that's why many of these countries pop-off the way they do: they know no single country can stop their nuclear volleys. Especially now with hyper sonics and missiles that can literally go around the world.
Countries who are more offensive-minded and spend more on research have a significant advantage because they're bound to find exploits and new tech the more defensive-minded countries never can predict.
Bottom line, nobody is stopping shyt once the nukes start flying. In this day and age, a single nuke flies and detonates for war usage and that means we're all done. It won't only be nuclear either: chemical weapons get dispatched and the atmosphere will pick those up and start spreading them in the water/wind.
Last edited: