Jump to content


Photo

Cold War, The Reimagined Series


  • Please log in to reply
6436 replies to this topic

#6421 glenn239

glenn239

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 4,456 posts

Posted Yesterday, 08:57 AM

 


 

I think the resistance to it is due to at least one person on this forum going into a masturbatory frenzy about certain weapons systems that exist on paper, and nobody knows how they'll work out in real life, and somehow those weapons systems are always Russian vs the interesting shit a wide variety of other countries are working on. And there's a huge middle ground between "nothing will ever change" and "OMG everybody scrap your surface ships immediately."

 

Edit: Plus the understandable antagonism towards that poster claiming to be Canadian but constantly posting "bow to our new Russian overlords" stuff, but I guess that's more FFZ.

 

 

 

On the Russian front, what I find most specifically concerning me specifically is in their nuclear arsenal, offensive missile/naval technology, and capacity to cause trouble throughout Eurasia by arming tribal forces and such with more modern kit.  I don't think the game is worth the candle and we need to roll the clock back to the era where Great Powers respected each others' spheres of influence.

 

For you personally, the thing I find puzzling is that you are American but at the same time you don't seem overly concerned about finding comprimises in situations that we can avoid violence and that could cost American servicemen and women their lives.  Frankly, I actually get the impression you'd gladly see thousands of Americans killed in some lost cause shithole or another, then blame everyone but your own attitudes for the outcome.    


Edited by glenn239, Yesterday, 08:59 AM.

  • 0

#6422 glenn239

glenn239

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 4,456 posts

Posted Yesterday, 09:10 AM

That three others managed to not be lost doesn't to me indicate success. Not that I particularly trust the NI anyway. Other articles, though not especially more authorative on the subject, seem to indicate that testing has gone badly and might even have been suspended:

 

"Of the four launches, the longest flight lasted for a little more than two minutes, allowing the missile to travel about 22 miles before crashing, said CNBC, citing a US intelligence report on the weapons program."

 

https://nypost.com/2...d-during-tests/

 

https://www.npr.org/...magery-suggests

 

Noted that your article suggests that all four crashed - the one I read said one crashed out of four.  If the article is correct and all four crashed, they've probably suspended further flights until they figure out the problem.  


  • 0

#6423 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Of the Veronica Cartwright Ilk

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 48,184 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eloiland

Posted Yesterday, 09:14 AM

What do you call a cruise missile that doesn't crash? A UAV. These are not UAV's, ergo......

 

 

There was certainly more than one crash, because there was more than one wave of radioactive iodine that went across Europe. The only question to my mind is how long they remained in the air before they stopped flying.


  • 0

#6424 Roman Alymov

Roman Alymov

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,396 posts
  • Location:Moscow, Russia
  • Interests:Tank recovery

Posted Yesterday, 09:44 AM

 

On the Russian front, what I find most specifically concerning me specifically is in their nuclear arsenal, offensive missile/naval technology, and capacity to cause trouble throughout Eurasia by arming tribal forces and such with more modern kit.  I don't think the game is worth the candle and we need to roll the clock back to the era where Great Powers respected each others' spheres of influence.

As far as i remember spheres of influence were newer exactly respected - but contested to certain degree, sometimes in very bloody local conflicts. But the only good thing about good old days of Cold War was nobody was seriously considering strikes on great powers territory or core interests (unlike now).


  • 0

#6425 Josh

Josh

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 13,202 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New York City

Posted Yesterday, 10:22 AM

 

That three others managed to not be lost doesn't to me indicate success. Not that I particularly trust the NI anyway. Other articles, though not especially more authorative on the subject, seem to indicate that testing has gone badly and might even have been suspended:

 

"Of the four launches, the longest flight lasted for a little more than two minutes, allowing the missile to travel about 22 miles before crashing, said CNBC, citing a US intelligence report on the weapons program."

 

https://nypost.com/2...d-during-tests/

 

https://www.npr.org/...magery-suggests

 

Noted that your article suggests that all four crashed - the one I read said one crashed out of four.  If the article is correct and all four crashed, they've probably suspended further flights until they figure out the problem.  

 

 

So end of the day, we've no confirmation that even modest tests of this system worked successfully, which was my point.


  • 0

#6426 glenn239

glenn239

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 4,456 posts

Posted Yesterday, 10:45 AM

 

 

 

 

So end of the day, we've no confirmation that even modest tests of this system worked successfully, which was my point.

 

 

Since it crashed in the sea it sounds like it was an actual full-up launch by a ship or aircraft under real world conditions.  Where did you get the idea that is a "modest" test?  The "modest" test will have been in the lab beforehand and it will have passed, because they then went to the next step.


  • 0

#6427 Brian Kennedy

Brian Kennedy

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 4,965 posts

Posted Yesterday, 10:53 AM

 

 


 

I think the resistance to it is due to at least one person on this forum going into a masturbatory frenzy about certain weapons systems that exist on paper, and nobody knows how they'll work out in real life, and somehow those weapons systems are always Russian vs the interesting shit a wide variety of other countries are working on. And there's a huge middle ground between "nothing will ever change" and "OMG everybody scrap your surface ships immediately."

 

Edit: Plus the understandable antagonism towards that poster claiming to be Canadian but constantly posting "bow to our new Russian overlords" stuff, but I guess that's more FFZ.

 

 

 

On the Russian front, what I find most specifically concerning me specifically is in their nuclear arsenal, offensive missile/naval technology, and capacity to cause trouble throughout Eurasia by arming tribal forces and such with more modern kit.  I don't think the game is worth the candle and we need to roll the clock back to the era where Great Powers respected each others' spheres of influence.

 

For you personally, the thing I find puzzling is that you are American but at the same time you don't seem overly concerned about finding comprimises in situations that we can avoid violence and that could cost American servicemen and women their lives.  Frankly, I actually get the impression you'd gladly see thousands of Americans killed in some lost cause shithole or another, then blame everyone but your own attitudes for the outcome.    

 

 

The part I find most puzzling about you is that you accuse anybody who doubts Russian claims about their weapons systems to be in favor of starting a war with Russia, and that we don't understand the value of human life the way you do because we don't think a super-nuclear-torpedo-drone is all that likely in the near future. 


  • 0

#6428 glenn239

glenn239

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 4,456 posts

Posted Yesterday, 10:55 AM

 

 

On the Russian front, what I find most specifically concerning me specifically is in their nuclear arsenal, offensive missile/naval technology, and capacity to cause trouble throughout Eurasia by arming tribal forces and such with more modern kit.  I don't think the game is worth the candle and we need to roll the clock back to the era where Great Powers respected each others' spheres of influence.

As far as i remember spheres of influence were newer exactly respected - but contested to certain degree, sometimes in very bloody local conflicts. But the only good thing about good old days of Cold War was nobody was seriously considering strikes on great powers territory or core interests (unlike now).

 

 

The end of the Cold War bred a sort of arrogance towards all  things Russian that was not the case when I was growing up in the 1970's and early 1980's.  Combined with social media it's bred a rear area warrior type that's long on opinions about how cowardly and bluffing Russians are.  Hence here where you see sopinions being offered about Russian weapons system under development based solely on the ideology that Russians are bluffers and liars.  I'm not so certain - I see a consistent technical trend against naval power from about 1900 onwards, accelerating as time goes on.


  • 0

#6429 Josh

Josh

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 13,202 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New York City

Posted Yesterday, 10:56 AM

Actually everything we've read to date indicates the missile test was land launched (Russian press releases, satellite photos), specifically NOT from a ship or aircraft. I don't think we've been given any indication of what the weapon will be launched from, so I suspect a mobile land based launcher if it ever reaches fruition. Perhaps my definition of modesty is off - I have worn drag in public - but I feel being launched in the air and heading consistently in one direction is a modest test of a missile, as opposed to say homing in on a target or successfully displaying flight maneuvers.


Edited by Josh, Yesterday, 11:00 AM.

  • 0

#6430 glenn239

glenn239

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 4,456 posts

Posted Yesterday, 11:00 AM

Brian Kennedy The part I find most puzzling about you is that you accuse anybody who doubts Russian claims about their weapons systems to be in favor of starting a war with Russia, and that we don't understand the value of human life the way you do because we don't think a super-nuclear-torpedo-drone is all that likely in the near future. 

 

 

As I just said, for an American you seem pretty eager to get  other Americans killed in pointless wars.  Myself, I'd be more enthusiastic about the whole thing if we'd actually managed to fight a war in 20 years that didn't turn into a shit show. You can't beat the Taliban in over 15 years but you're telling me you can stand down the Russians?  Fuck off.


Edited by glenn239, Yesterday, 11:01 AM.

  • 0

#6431 Josh

Josh

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 13,202 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New York City

Posted Yesterday, 11:05 AM

 


The end of the Cold War bred a sort of arrogance towards all  things Russian that was not the case when I was growing up in the 1970's and early 1980's.  Combined with social media it's bred a rear area warrior type that's long on opinions about how cowardly and bluffing Russians are.  Hence here where you see sopinions being offered about Russian weapons system under development based solely on the ideology that Russians are bluffers and liars.  I'm not so certain - I see a consistent technical trend against naval power from about 1900 onwards, accelerating as time goes on.

 

 

There was a lot of arrogance towards the Russians post cold war because they lost and the Soviet nation state and its military splintered. To the victor go the spoils. That was less the case when the Soviet Union was an intact country with a larger number of nuclear weapons than the US, definitely. But even back then no one considered the Soviets to be paragons of honestly; rather quite the opposite. No one trusted Pravda then; no one in their right mind trusts Pravda now. As for 'cowardice', I've no seen anyone remotely insinuate that idea in any of threads you infest.


  • 0

#6432 glenn239

glenn239

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 4,456 posts

Posted Yesterday, 11:05 AM

Actually everything we've read to date indicates the missile test was land launched (Russian press releases, satellite photos), specifically NOT from a ship or aircraft. I don't think we've been given any indication of what the weapon will be launched from, so I suspect a mobile land based launcher if it ever reaches fruition. Perhaps my definition of modesty is off - I have worn drag in public - but I feel being launched in the air and heading consistently in one direction is a modest test of a missile, as opposed to say homing in on a target or successfully displaying flight maneuvers.

 

Enought for now.  Let's see what the next year brings on the matter.


  • 0

#6433 glenn239

glenn239

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 4,456 posts

Posted Yesterday, 11:19 AM

Josh There was a lot of arrogance towards the Russians post cold war because they lost and the Soviet nation state and its military splintered. To the victor go the spoils. That was less the case when the Soviet Union was an intact country with a larger number of nuclear weapons than the US, definitely. But even back then no one considered the Soviets to be paragons of honestly; rather quite the opposite. No one trusted Pravda then; no one in their right mind trusts Pravda now. As for 'cowardice', I've no seen anyone remotely insinuate that idea in any of threads you infest.

 

 

The initial reaction to the fall of the Soviet Union was not arrogance, it was more a sense that the Cold War was done, democracy won, and we were all on the same side.  The arrogance and contempt slipped in over time, as familiarity bred contempt and globalist ideology moved towards some sort of mission to transform the world into the West.  The militaries seem to still have strong mutual respect though, and that's the most important thing.


Edited by glenn239, Yesterday, 11:21 AM.

  • 0

#6434 GARGEAN

GARGEAN

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,754 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted Yesterday, 11:36 AM

So end of the day, we've no confirmation that even modest tests of this system worked successfully, which was my point.

 

To be honest, we don't have confirmation that any of tests were ever done. All those "news" about failed tests and russians searching sunked missiles were just western speculations.


  • 0

#6435 Brian Kennedy

Brian Kennedy

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 4,965 posts

Posted Yesterday, 12:18 PM

 

Brian Kennedy The part I find most puzzling about you is that you accuse anybody who doubts Russian claims about their weapons systems to be in favor of starting a war with Russia, and that we don't understand the value of human life the way you do because we don't think a super-nuclear-torpedo-drone is all that likely in the near future. 

 

 

As I just said, for an American you seem pretty eager to get  other Americans killed in pointless wars.  Myself, I'd be more enthusiastic about the whole thing if we'd actually managed to fight a war in 20 years that didn't turn into a shit show. You can't beat the Taliban in over 15 years but you're telling me you can stand down the Russians?  Fuck off.

 

 

Please point to a post I've written in the past ten years in which I appeared eager to get the U.S. involved in _any_ war. If you don't, I'm going to assume that you're completely aware that you're talking out of your strawman ass.


  • 0

#6436 Stuart Galbraith

Stuart Galbraith

    Of the Veronica Cartwright Ilk

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 48,184 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Eloiland

Posted 40 minutes ago

 
Britain will increase military support for Ukraine as the country continues to face Russian aggression.

Additional troops and a Royal Navy ship will be deployed to Ukraine to defend “freedom and democracy”, The Telegraph reported on Wednesday.

"The UK will increase military support for Ukraine as the country continues to face Russian aggression, the Defence Secretary will announce today," the report reads.

Ukrainian Special Forces and Marines will be trained by British personnel and HMS Echo, a Royal Navy hydrographic survey ship with a company of 72, will deploy to the region.

“As long as Ukraine faces Russian hostilities, it will find a steadfast partner in the United Kingdom,” Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson says.

 

Which is great, but I dont think we are going to be defending much with an unarmed Hydrographic survey ship. But we will probably get some nice maps out of it if nothing else.


  • 0

#6437 GARGEAN

GARGEAN

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,754 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 24 minutes ago

Freedom and democracy...
  • 0




2 user(s) are reading this topic

1 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users


    Stuart Galbraith