State ownership of companies

[TJC1]

They don't appear to have that capability right now. It's only a matter of time.

 

These extremist groups will continue to exist in one form or another until the supporting states are dealt with. Hopefully it will never come to a nuclear exchange, but you have to prepare for the worst as a deterrent.

 

The threat of nuclear retaliation protects us from nuclear or similar attack. You have to be prepared to retaliate in kind for the deterrence to work.

 

Like north korea...its smoke and mirrors. Just going on the costs and complications of trident we know how hard it is. You think ISIS has that kind of clout?

[Cyclone]

How could you respond to a nuclear attack from a non geographically based organisation?

[unbeliever]

How could you respond to a nuclear attack from a non geographically based organisation?

 

Go after their sponsors.

Somebody will have supplied them with the nuclear material and somebody will be responsible for resourcing them to organise the attack.

They'll not do it again if their capital glows in the dark as well.

 

---------- Post added 12-08-2015 at 14:37 ----------

 

Like north korea...its smoke and mirrors. Just going on the costs and complications of trident we know how hard it is. You think ISIS has that kind of clout?

 

You're kidding right.

This technology is over 70 years old.

They don't need high precision, miniaturised, long range weapons like we have.

They just need 50kg of plutonium or highly enriched uranium in 2 halves, a truck, and a mechanism to push the 2 halves together when they get to their target.

Edited August 12, 2015 by unbeliever

[TJC1]

Go after their sponsors.

Somebody will have supplied them with the nuclear material and somebody will be responsible for resourcing them to organise the attack.

They'll not do it again if their capital glows in the dark as well.

 

---------- Post added 12-08-2015 at 14:37 ----------

 

 

You're kidding right.

This technology is over 70 years old.

They don't need high precision, miniaturised, long range weapons like we have.

They just need 50kg of plutonium or highly enriched uranium in 2 halves, a truck, and a button or lever to push the 2 halves together when they get to their target.

 

And youre response to any attack is to use trident? Non of this makes sense other than to satiate a jingoistic thirst for vengeance.

 

---------- Post added 12-08-2015 at 14:42 ----------

 

How could you respond to a nuclear attack from a non geographically based organisation?

 

An air attack..even then...terrorist groups are fractured.

[unbeliever]

And youre response to any attack is to use trident? Non of this makes sense other than to satiate a jingoistic thirst for vengeance.

 

Not any attack. I'm saying you respond to weapons of mass destruction in kind.

The threat of vengeance is what deterrence is all about.

Look, I know it's not ideal, but what else is there?

 

You really can't be considering the strongly worded letter to the UN.

I wasn't serious with that you know.

 

---------- Post added 12-08-2015 at 14:48 ----------

 

An air attack..even then...terrorist groups are fractured.

 

And make it a policy to hide within civilian populations.

 

WW1 was started not by the direct actions of a government, but by an extremist group based in Serbia with links to the government of that country.

 

We really didn't want to kill millions of German civilians in WW2, but we had little choice.

This is how war is. There's no real justice. There's no good outcome. But most of the time, you can keep it from happening if you show your enemy that they will suffer more than you if they start the damn war.

[Obelix]

the atomic bomb Little Boy, dropped on the Japanese city of Hiroshima during the Second World War, had an energy yield of around 15 kilotons, killing as many as 80,000 people instantly. Therefore, a single warhead in a Trident II D5 missile has the destructive power equivalent to over six Hiroshimas at once.

 

Who you going to aim a 100 kiloton weapon at? Pakistan? Syria?

You really havent thought it through have you

 

You aim it at the people who attacked you...... that's obvious to everyone. Oh and it's dial-a-yield btw, anywhere from about 10kT to 120kT

 

If ISIS attacked us with WMD, I'd quite happily tell Russia and the USA that we were about to launch so they didn't get too nervous, and then I'd glass ISIS's homelands into the biggest carpark that the world has ever seen. That's how MAD works. That's what keeps the peace, bizzare as it sounds.

 

---------- Post added 12-08-2015 at 15:18 ----------

 

First of all, terrorist groups dont have those capabilities.

 

Yes they do. They can read a physics book as well as anyone else.

 

Want to make a big bang? Steal some 85% HEU from Russia, you could at one point get it fairly cheaply from the new capitalists that were selling it. Or just filch some from a nuclear plant, set up a calutron and separate your own. As for missing fuel, the USA has lost tonnes, literally, of reactor fuel on several occasions before now.

 

Getting it is not easy, but not insurmountably difficult either, and the rest of it is easy.

 

Find someone who has a basic knowledge of chemistry, and can forge iron. Your average middle age blacksmith is all you need. Melt the uranium and cast a 38kg cup, and a 38kg bung to fill the inside of the cup.

 

Put the bung into the cup. Really quickly. You can do it with a strong spring, like a truck coil spring, or you can fire it in with a 4 inch artillery tube. Either way I guarantee it will absolutely go off, no questions asked whatsoever, and you will end up with a really big mess and a really big cloud, and an awful lot of very dead people.

 

And all that above, is all in the public domain. Building a bomb is really very very easy. Delivering it is tricky unless you don't object going to Paradise.... The only thing stopping it from happening is that it's tricky to get hold of the starting material - but it's not impossible.

 

Trident is expensive for two reasons - the delivery system is pricey as it's designed to attack bunkers and needs incredible accuracy, and the delivery system mandates a small efficient implosion warhead. An improvised device can be much heavier, and if you can drive into a city in a truck, it's delivered....

Edited August 12, 2015 by Obelix

[TJC1]

You aim it at the people who attacked you...... that's obvious to everyone. Oh and it's dial-a-yield btw, anywhere from about 10kT to 120kT

 

If ISIS attacked us with WMD, I'd quite happily tell Russia and the USA that we were about to launch so they didn't get too nervous, and then I'd glass ISIS's homelands into the biggest carpark that the world has ever seen. That's how MAD works. That's what keeps the peace, bizzare as it sounds.

 

---------- Post added 12-08-2015 at 15:18 ----------

 

 

Yes they do. They can read a physics book as well as anyone else.

 

Want to make a big bang? Steal some 85% HEU from Russia, you could at one point get it fairly cheaply from the new capitalists that were selling it. Or just filch some from a nuclear plant, set up a calutron and separate your own. As for missing fuel, the USA has lost tonnes, literally, of reactor fuel on several occasions before now.

 

Getting it is not easy, but not insurmountably difficult either, and the rest of it is easy.

 

Find someone who has a basic knowledge of chemistry, and can forge iron. Your average middle age blacksmith is all you need. Melt the uranium and cast a 38kg cup, and a 38kg bung to fill the inside of the cup.

 

Put the bung into the cup. Really quickly. You can do it with a strong spring, like a truck coil spring, or you can fire it in with a 4 inch artillery tube. Either way I guarantee it will absolutely go off, no questions asked whatsoever, and you will end up with a really big mess and a really big cloud, and an awful lot of very dead people.

 

And all that above, is all in the public domain. Building a bomb is really very very easy. Delivering it is tricky unless you don't object going to Paradise.... The only thing stopping it from happening is that it's tricky to get hold of the starting material - but it's not impossible.

 

Trident is expensive for two reasons - the delivery system is pricey as it's designed to attack bunkers and needs incredible accuracy, and the delivery system mandates a small efficient implosion warhead. An improvised device can be much heavier, and if you can drive into a city in a truck, it's delivered....

 

Wikipedia that did you...so are you still asserting we aim a nuclear missile at the terrorists or now is it a whole country?

You just cant get your argument straight.

 

---------- Post added 12-08-2015 at 15:59 ----------

 

Not any attack. I'm saying you respond to weapons of mass destruction in kind.

The threat of vengeance is what deterrence is all about.

Look, I know it's not ideal, but what else is there?

 

You really can't be considering the strongly worded letter to the UN.

I wasn't serious with that you know.

 

---------- Post added 12-08-2015 at 14:48 ----------

 

 

And make it a policy to hide within civilian populations.

 

WW1 was started not by the direct actions of a government, but by an extremist group based in Serbia with links to the government of that country.

 

We really didn't want to kill millions of German civilians in WW2, but we had little choice.

This is how war is. There's no real justice. There's no good outcome. But most of the time, you can keep it from happening if you show your enemy that they will suffer more than you if they start the damn war.

 

How about putting resources into intelligence and infiltrating networks...just an idea. It seems to work on the whole.

[unbeliever]

Wikipedia that did you...so are you still asserting we aim a nuclear missile at the terrorists or now is it a whole country?

You just cant get your argument straight.

 

Proportional response.

They kill us, even if they use non-state proxies to do it, and we kill them back.

It's a deterrent.

 

That's how deterrence works. And if we don't mean it and they don't believe it, it doesn't work. Anything else is an invitation for war.

 

---------- Post added 12-08-2015 at 16:02 ----------

 

How about putting resources into intelligence and infiltrating networks...just an idea. It seems to work on the whole.

 

Like we're not doing that now.

[TJC1]

Proportional response.

They kill us, even if they use non-state proxies to do it, and we kill them back.

It's a deterrent.

 

That's how deterrence works. And if we don't mean it and they don't believe it, it doesn't work. Anything else is an invitation for war.

 

---------- Post added 12-08-2015 at 16:02 ----------

 

 

Like we're not doing that now.

 

Extremist views are involved, if terrorists could launch a devastating nuclear attack they would have done it by now.

 

---------- Post added 12-08-2015 at 16:08 ----------

 

Keep china and usa on side we will be ok.

Scrap trident, waste of money.

[unbeliever]

Extremist views are involved, if terrorists could launch a devastating nuclear attack they would have done it by now.

 

You're ignoring the fact that they would likely have to get key components of their WMD from a state sponsor. The state sponsor knows that they would be held responsible by the victims and doesn't want to get nuked in retaliation.

 

These extremist groups always have state sponsors.