User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 10/30/2019 9:11:01 AM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Just thought of this too. There's got to be an EAM that basically says "Hey F22s in Alaska and all Virginia and Seawolf subs, you are weapons free. Engage everything" |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/30/2019 9:13:32 AM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Things like that would come through a supplemental rules of engagement order. I wouldn't expect that to go through EAM channels. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Just thought of this too. There's got to be an EAM that basically says "Hey F22s in Alaska and all Virginia and Seawolf subs, you are weapons free. Engage everything" Well I know our attack subs basically go out and try to find and track enemy boomers. I wonder how many we find each mission. (Obviously we'll never know.) But I bet we could get a few if we wanted. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/30/2019 11:18:09 AM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Think I've read that at some point during the cold war, the soviets had in their plan that if we exceeded them by X amount in capability, they were going to launch as it would have been to lopsided to win without doing so. Could be a figment of imagination, or someone said something that wasn't true. Interesting pic https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/bb/US_and_USSR_nuclear_stockpiles.svg Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
An important thing to keep in mind is second and third order effects of Today: Single missile from Russia ICBM goes up. We don't know if it was inadvertantly launched, if it's armed, if it was a rogue element, or a calulated precursor to a followup strike. It'll be over the central US in 27 minutes. Mr. President Whiskers...how do you respond? Nothing? Could have been inadvertantly and not armed. I mean its not like we're at war or anything right now right? SLBM? How many? Single target or multiple locations? Nuclear decapitation strike? Scary part about them is there's zero thinking due to flight times. Forces a leader to make a ridiculouly fast decision affected 100s of millions of people ICBM? Again, how many and what purpose? Targeting their nuclear assets? Puts them in a use or lose situation. What are they gonna pick? The Cold War was cool. Both sides had over 50,000 warheads, so nobody was dumb enough to try anything. Interesting pic https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/bb/US_and_USSR_nuclear_stockpiles.svg |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/30/2019 11:47:00 AM EDT
[#4]
Just build an AI machine, call it Collosus and give it control over the nukes. Problem solved.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/30/2019 11:55:48 AM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
From the layman’s perspective, It all seems to me that one must assume there is a rational basis for another nation to launch a first strike. MAD will not happen. No rational nation would dare go for massive strikes on all population centers because we would do it in kind back. That is just suicide. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/30/2019 12:00:44 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Just build an AI machine, call it Collosus and give it control over the nukes. Problem solved. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/30/2019 12:15:27 PM EDT
[#7]
Another story to look up about how close we've come to the nuclear exchange was the Soviet sub we were harrassing off Cuba during the Cuban missile crisis.
The captain on the ship was prepared to fire a nuclear torpedo. By the grace of God someone on board had the authority to overrule him via vote |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/30/2019 12:26:41 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Just build an AI machine, call it Collosus and give it control over the nukes. Problem solved. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/30/2019 12:29:22 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Just thought of this too. There's got to be an EAM that basically says "Hey F22s in Alaska and all Virginia and Seawolf subs, you are weapons free. Engage everything" |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/30/2019 12:39:06 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
EAMs are for nuclear weapon capable commands. F22s and fast attacks don't carry nuclear weapons. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Just thought of this too. There's got to be an EAM that basically says "Hey F22s in Alaska and all Virginia and Seawolf subs, you are weapons free. Engage everything" Obviously you'd know better than me. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/30/2019 12:42:22 PM EDT
[#11]
This was an intresting read.
https://nationalinterest.org/feature/the-soviet-unions-insane-plan-crush-nato-battle-13355 "The United States would greatly surpass that number, of course. America’s nuclear war plans are organized under the Single Integrated Operational Plan (SIOP), which was first created in 1960. Although the SIOP is a tightly guarded secret, some information on the earliest SIOPs has been declassified. These show that, early on in the Cold War, “A full nuclear SIOP strike launched on a preemptive basis would have delivered over 3,200 nuclear weapons to 1,060 targets in the Soviet Union, China, and allied countries in Asia and Europe.” Under the plan, the United States would not distinguish between Communist nations that were at war with the United States and ones that were not (sorry, China)." |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/30/2019 12:45:20 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I think 30 minutes is enough to get him in the air. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/30/2019 12:54:20 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The AGM-129 ACM (Advanced Cruise Missile) was a step in that direction of a stealth missile. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/30/2019 12:55:13 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This was an intresting read. https://nationalinterest.org/feature/the-soviet-unions-insane-plan-crush-nato-battle-13355 "The United States would greatly surpass that number, of course. America’s nuclear war plans are organized under the Single Integrated Operational Plan (SIOP), which was first created in 1960. Although the SIOP is a tightly guarded secret, some information on the earliest SIOPs has been declassified. These show that, early on in the Cold War, “A full nuclear SIOP strike launched on a preemptive basis would have delivered over 3,200 nuclear weapons to 1,060 targets in the Soviet Union, China, and allied countries in Asia and Europe.” Under the plan, the United States would not distinguish between Communist nations that were at war with the United States and ones that were not (sorry, China)." |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/30/2019 1:18:18 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If they had a sub parked off the east coast... it wouldn’t take 30 minutes |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/30/2019 1:32:28 PM EDT
[#16]
|
|
|
|
Posted: 10/30/2019 1:59:13 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I don't think a state actor would first strike on us. But if it is I'd say China. Just think what would happen with a recovered nuke, one of the various ones that have been forgotten or lost over the years. I would hate to see what happens if an arms dealer gets ahold of one. Especially if they are from South Africa. Pay off a general or two to stage an attack and, well we probably wouldn't be here to know if our response was effective. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/31/2019 4:25:11 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I think there is at least a decent chance some organization will make it look as though an attack by a state actor is threatening us. Iran's attack on the oil fields shows what a nation can do if they want to, not to mention the decades of experience the US and Russia have in third world countries doing the same, but on a smaller scale. Just think what would happen with a recovered nuke, one of the various ones that have been forgotten or lost over the years. I would hate to see what happens if an arms dealer gets ahold of one. Especially if they are from South Africa. Pay off a general or two to stage an attack and, well we probably wouldn't be here to know if our response was effective. Former USSR nukes aren't nearly the threat they used to be. These days most of them probably aren't good for much more than a dirty bomb. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/31/2019 5:24:20 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The various scenarios get rehearsed/updated quite often as we've had ~70 years of time to think of what-ifs. President will be given a quick update on the whatfor and presented with a few options ranging from nothing to mad max. He gets to make that decision based on whatever limited data is available at the time That said, there's been quite a few close calls through those years that we know about (and likely more that's classified). IIRC there was one in the 80s, during Reforger?, that had the only thing standinh between a nuclear exchange was a Russian willing to disobey standing orders. A malfunction in some system indicated a first strike inbound |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/31/2019 5:28:50 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Or we can call it Mike after the A.I. in The Moon is a Harsh Mistress. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/31/2019 5:46:22 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Just build an AI machine, call it Collosus and give it control over the nukes. Problem solved. |
|
|
|
Posted: 10/31/2019 11:37:14 PM EDT
[#22]
Apparently, Jimmy Carter had difficulties understanding the play book (found it to be too complex) and ordered it to be simplified. This allowed for a quicker decision to be made and a more appropriate response to the situation.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 11/1/2019 12:09:28 AM EDT
[#23]
This is a great thread.
As for the OP, I think a first strike would come from a rogue like NK of Iran or some such country or ideal that has had a hardon for American life and freedom in general for a very long time. Much the same as September 11 2001, it took a little time to sort out where the attacks came from and who the initial perps were. The response did not happen overnight. Unless it was a multiple ICBM strike where the players who have them would be easily identified I doubt there would be a knee jerk reaction to respond. If it was USSR or China, it would be obvious and the response would be one that neither country could recover from, they may have the nukes but they do not have the layered defenses that the USA has. A retaliatory strike would be something that they could not prevent or survive. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/1/2019 8:23:57 AM EDT
[#24]
Quote History |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/1/2019 8:46:24 AM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Bunch of leftist hand-wringing. OMG US is so dangerous we will provoke the crazies!! Disarm so the crazies don't hurt us!! Quote HistoryQuoted:
Bunch of leftist hand-wringing. OMG US is so dangerous we will provoke the crazies!! Disarm so the crazies don't hurt us!! "That's fucking awesome. Those faggots don't have that. We'd wreck shop." |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/1/2019 10:44:52 AM EDT
[#26]
I don’t know if the US has any super stealthy, don’t-know-it’s-there-until-it-goes-boom nukes, but I’ll bet we could make them if we wanted to (and probably should).
ETA probably conventional cruisemissles too. “What was that? Did you hear something?” BOOM |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/1/2019 10:40:02 PM EDT
[#27]
Quoted:
So the football has several different options for launching an attack. How the heck do you make a decision that important in what I'm sure would be a very small time frame? Do the responses utilize subs or ICBMs? If both are available, which gets picked? Any good books on how our nukes are setup for either a first strike or a counter? An hour later, several tactical nuclear missiles take out purely military facilities around Europe. What do we do? And 6 hours after that several key US Navy bases in the continental US are hit by tactical nukes from submarines as well? That's how nuclear strategy plays out. Nuclear weapons give you an incredible advantage in war but the danger is you will spark a retaliation chain which leads to everyone's destruction. Strategic nuclear weapons aimed at American or Soviet population centers would have certainly resulted in a full scale retaliation. The danger was that someone could have used tactical nukes out of desperation which would lead to retaliation, leading to counter retaliations until the strategic nukes started flying. |
|
|
|
Posted: 11/1/2019 10:50:34 PM EDT
[#28]
No names or anything, but I know someone that played a role with the football. I think there were certain codes that needed to be punched in that represented coordinates. I believe the codes changed daily or as often as they needed to depending on the real or perceived threat.
|
|
|
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
