TranceAddict Forums

TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Chill Out Room
-- Russia vs. Georgia
Pages (17): « 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 »


Posted by Krypton on Aug-11-2008 01:46:

quote:
Originally posted by know you
lol sod off, only twats go in PDD. If you want to run into a brick wall then you take stuff to PDD as that is all it has ever been.


lol, nonsense. The PDD will scrutinize everything you say. Some people can't handle it..


Posted by Krypton on Aug-11-2008 01:46:

quote:
Originally posted by dj_alfi




is that hair on her chest?


Posted by on Aug-11-2008 01:50:

quote:
Originally posted by Krypton
lol, nonsense. The PDD will scrutinize everything you say. Some people can't handle it..



lol yea right, you get gimps like pkc, hardcore trancer, zionist, anti-zionists, and others who are so blind to anything besides themselves that they'd bash their head against a wall to a bloody pulp if they figured it'd get people to see their point.


Posted by jonSun on Aug-11-2008 01:51:

quote:
Originally posted by Krypton
is that hair on her chest?


she sponsors a hair growth hormone pill.


Posted by Krypton on Aug-11-2008 02:01:

quote:
Originally posted by know you
lol yea right, you get gimps like pkc, hardcore trancer, zionist, anti-zionists, and others who are so blind to anything besides themselves that they'd bash their head against a wall to a bloody pulp if they figured it'd get people to see their point.


That's the nature of the beast. If you don't know what you support, then what's the point? It's a great place where a wide variety of views clash in a battle of ideas. Only the best supported, well-evidenced, logical views prevail. And if someone is "blind", then by all means, prove they are blind. The great thing about the PDD is labeling someone blind will get you nowhere in the debate because it proves only your own narrowness of view. Rather than label people blind, destroy their argument with your own well-thought out premises. It's not hard at all.


Posted by Enjoy on Aug-11-2008 02:04:

quote:
Originally posted by aNYthing
I really hope NATO steps in and starts sending Russians back... nicely packaged, in a dis-assembled form - in caskets. Fucking commie bastards are still alive and well. we should have choked them when we had a chance, instead of giving them money like that fuckhead clinton did to that alchoholic yeltsin.

nothing would make me happier than a heavy russian casualty count.


Fuck you.


Posted by Enjoy on Aug-11-2008 02:05:

quote:
Originally posted by blacknoizybox
my gf's sister and her baby is now trying to flee Georgia by air but those motherfucking commies bombed the airport so forgive my french but

BURN IN HELL RUSSIAN PIGS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

YOU'LL GET WHAT YOU DESERVE, SLAVES!!!!!!!!!!!!!


сука бендеровская


Posted by Domesticated on Aug-11-2008 02:12:

quote:
Originally posted by know you
If you want to go by military prowess then the US is ahead, both in conventional and nuclear capabilities, but when you talk about the nuclear capabilities its talking in terms of how many times over you can destroy the earth, and in that regards the Soviets win


You just contradicted yourself within two sentences.


quote:
Originally posted by know you It was never, ever a question of range.


It was always about range. Why do you think the Cuban Missile Crisis was such a big issue? Up until then, the USSR didn't have anything within practical striking distance of the US.


Posted by Krypton on Aug-11-2008 02:28:

quote:
Originally posted by Beat Blog
It was always about range. Why do you think the Cuban Missile Crisis was such a big issue? Up until then, the USSR didn't have anything within practical striking distance of the US.


They had inter-continental ballistic missiles (ICBM).


Posted by denys envy on Aug-11-2008 02:30:

quote:
Originally posted by Krypton
is that hair on her chest?


beach* volleyball

*beach made of sand.


Posted by on Aug-11-2008 02:35:

quote:
Originally posted by Beat Blog
You just contradicted yourself within two sentences.




It was always about range. Why do you think the Cuban Missile Crisis was such a big issue? Up until then, the USSR didn't have anything within practical striking distance of the US.



You are looking at nuclear warfare in very blunt terms my friend.

The US has better accuracy, which enables a better first strike capability. The Trident D5 (Trident II) has a circular error probability (where a warhead will fall 50% of the time) of 200-300 feet. Each one of these missiles can carry up to 12 individually targeted warheads of up to 475 Kilotons (that's thousands of tons of TNT) in yield. For comparisons in yield, Hiroshima was only 13 Kilotons and it destroyed the whole city.

Alright, now lets talk about range, range is not an issue in how you are thinking of it. All these countries can hit each other, that has not been an issue. Range in nuclear warfare is all about TIME. The shorter amount of time it takes your missiles to reach the other guys the better.

Nuclear war will be fought in three stages.

The first stage is the most critical. In this stage you target the enemies missiles and bombers (hopefully while still on the ground). Here time to target and accuracy take the cake. The faster your missiles get there and the more accurate they are the more likely you are able to get their birds on the ground. The other half of this part is decapitation strikes on the enemy nations capital. Very depressed trajectory sub launched ballistic missiles will be used to take out the nations capitals, hopefully slowing the nations response time.

This is where the Trident D5 comes into play, its very accurate, very survivable (its in submarines), and has short flight times... With each missile boat carrying 24 of these you can hit a whole of targets very very fast.

I won't go into much detail about the second and third stages, but basically the second stage is to hit industrial and military complex targets, such as power plants, airports, naval and army bases, etc. The third stage is to target population centers.

The Cuban missile crisis was not about the range, the Soviets had missiles that could hit the US from Russia at that time, granted not many, and they were fairly unreliable, but they could. Cuba presented a shorter flight time. 10 minutes across the Eastern Seaboard. Not nearly enough time for the US to mobilize its nuclear forces.

Even at this time the US had missile systems in Turkey that could hit Moscow in about the same amount of time, but the US still maintained a fleet of Atlas and Titan/Titan II ICBM's in the US as well as a large heavy bomber force.

This was the same all the way up till the end of the Cold War, granted beyond SLBM forces the Soviets never placed ground launched missiles within short striking distance of the United States, but they did have MIRV tipped SS-20's on their western border within 2-3 minutes striking times of most of the western European capitals. The US had GLCM systems and the Pershing II systems in the UK and West Germany as well, all providing short flight times to Moscow. At this same time both sides maintained a massive set of ICBMs (SS-18 Satans among others in the Soviet Union, and Minuteman II/III and Peacekeeper systems in the US).

So I did not contradict myself, the US has more accurate/faster systems, but the Soviets/Russians have more systems, but that is all moot anyways because both sides have enough power to destroy the world many many times over.

I'm sort of a nuclear war buff... so I'm pretty sure I'm spot on with most of this information...


Posted by Domesticated on Aug-11-2008 02:42:

quote:
Originally posted by Domesticated
It was always about range. Why do you think the Cuban Missile Crisis was such a big issue? Up until then, the USSR didn't have anything within practical striking distance of the US.


Practical striking distance; i.e time.

quote:
Originally posted by know you
You are looking at nuclear warfare in very blunt terms my friend.

The US has better accuracy, which enables a better first strike capability. The Trident D5 (Trident II) has a circular error probability (where a warhead will fall 50% of the time) of 200-300 feet. Each one of these missiles can carry up to 12 individually targeted warheads of up to 475 Kilotons (that's thousands of tons of TNT) in yield. For comparisons in yield, Hiroshima was only 13 Kilotons and it destroyed the whole city.




300 feet makes a difference with a nuclear warhead?

Meh, you clearly know what you're talking about far more than I do, so I'm going to give up right here, especially since you went to all the trouble of typing that huge essay.


Posted by on Aug-11-2008 02:45:

quote:
Originally posted by Beat Blog
Practical striking distance; i.e time.


Your statement was that the Soviets lost the Cold War because of the range of their missiles. Even if you can justify your statement about the Cuban Missile Crisis it doesn't negate the fact that even if they did have missiles there they could still have waged a terrible nuclear holocaust from their own soil.


Posted by pkcRAISTLIN on Aug-11-2008 02:47:

lol. know you obviously = nou.


Posted by on Aug-11-2008 02:48:

quote:
Originally posted by Beat Blog
Practical striking distance; i.e time.





300 feet makes a difference with a nuclear warhead?

Meh, you clearly know what you're talking about far more than I do, so I'm going to give up right here, especially since you went to all the trouble of typing that huge essay.


Just to clarify, actually it does matter. Missile silos are very very very tough structures.

This is true to the extent that not only does the US have accurate missiles to target these structures, they usually devote 2 warheads per silo.

Basically what I am trying to say is a confrontation with the US and Russia would most likely end the world as we know it.


Posted by on Aug-11-2008 02:48:

quote:
Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
lol. know you obviously = nou.


man if you are the first person to figure that out...


Posted by pkcRAISTLIN on Aug-11-2008 02:54:

quote:
Originally posted by know you
man if you are the first person to figure that out...


well i wouldnt have known except for the instant hardon youve shown for nuclear war


Posted by on Aug-11-2008 02:59:

quote:
Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
well i wouldnt have known except for the instant hardon youve shown for nuclear war



haha... well it is my greatest fear and my greatest love...


Posted by SuspicionVandit on Aug-11-2008 02:59:

oh please.

October 16, 1962. President Kennedy received word that the Soviets were in the process of deploying intermediate-range ballistic missiles in Cuba. The president demanded that the Soviets dismantle and remove the missiles. At the same time, he announced a naval blockade to prevent further missile shipments from reaching Cuba. But the Soviets didn't back down, instead placing their armed forces on secondary alert. Soviet transport ships carrying missiles continued on course toward Cuba. US and Soviet forces went on alert for an all-out nuclear war. Frantic negotiations were conducted through the UN's Emergency Security Council and unofficial channels to end the hair-trigger standoff. Finally, on October 28, the Soviet Union agreed to remove its missiles from Cuba. And so the world avoided a nuclear holocaust. But in order to get the Soviets to pull their missiles out, we had to make a deal.

The Jupiter IRBMs deployed in Turkey were obsolete and we were going to get rid of them anyway. They had no strategic value whatsoever to either the US or the Russians. The Turkey deal was a ruse - a cover story that was fed to the other intelligence agencies around the world.

They wanted us to return Sokolov. That famous rocket scientist. Nikolai Stepanovich Sokolov. He's head of the OKB-754 Design Bureau, one of the Soviet's top-secret weapon research facilities, and the East's foremost expert on weapons development. It was either give up Sokolov or risk full-scale nuclear war. In the end, we had no choice.

more here


Posted by aNYthing on Aug-11-2008 03:06:

quote:
Originally posted by Enjoy
Fuck you.


Thanks for the offer, but I'll pass. I'm done slumming.

������ ������ ��������, �����, ��� ���� ������ ����������.

� ���� - ���� ��������� - ���� � ���� � ����� �� ������, �������� � ���������. ������� ����� �������� �������������� ��� ���������. ����� ���� ��������� � �������� �������, �� ���������� ��������� �� ���������� ������� ��������� ��������.


Posted by on Aug-11-2008 03:07:

quote:
Originally posted by SuspicionVandit
oh please.

October 16, 1962. President Kennedy received word that the Soviets were in the process of deploying intermediate-range ballistic missiles in Cuba. The president demanded that the Soviets dismantle and remove the missiles. At the same time, he announced a naval blockade to prevent further missile shipments from reaching Cuba. But the Soviets didn't back down, instead placing their armed forces on secondary alert. Soviet transport ships carrying missiles continued on course toward Cuba. US and Soviet forces went on alert for an all-out nuclear war. Frantic negotiations were conducted through the UN's Emergency Security Council and unofficial channels to end the hair-trigger standoff. Finally, on October 28, the Soviet Union agreed to remove its missiles from Cuba. And so the world avoided a nuclear holocaust. But in order to get the Soviets to pull their missiles out, we had to make a deal.

The Jupiter IRBMs deployed in Turkey were obsolete and we were going to get rid of them anyway. They had no strategic value whatsoever to either the US or the Russians. The Turkey deal was a ruse - a cover story that was fed to the other intelligence agencies around the world.

They wanted us to return Sokolov. That famous rocket scientist. Nikolai Stepanovich Sokolov. He's head of the OKB-754 Design Bureau, one of the Soviet's top-secret weapon research facilities, and the East's foremost expert on weapons development. It was either give up Sokolov or risk full-scale nuclear war. In the end, we had no choice.

more here



While I have never heard the Sokolov story, the Jupiter ruse was very well played.

The main reason the Soviets agreed to it though was a promise by the US to not attempt another over throw of Cuba. The Jupiter missiles were just face saving for the US.


Posted by aNYthing on Aug-11-2008 03:16:

quote:
Originally posted by Beat Blog
You're a fucking moron.

You're actually wishing death on thousands of people who are no different to yourself (except for the fact that you're a complete twat and they're not)?


I just love hearing from Aussies fags like yourself and that PkcCretin "character". For kangoroo-banging bogans, you're quite involved in world affairs, while knowing JACK SHIT.

These people ARE different from me. Explain how I am more of a twat than an AK-47 strapped russki soldier? I'm not wishing death on Ossetians - their pawn goverment made that choice for their people by being a pawn in Russia's game of politics and settling scores. I lived in the area that was FUCKED by Russians (in every meaning of the word) for over 300 years... So forgive me if I don't get all sentimental over dead russian soldiers who have no fucking business being in a land they have no claim to.

Fucking hypocrites run and point fingers at Israel (which, by the way, has more rights to the land they "occupy") while doing even worse in Georgia. You wanna see ethnic cleansing? Take a look at what those russian fucktards are doing to GEORGIA before you call me a twat, ok, ya puss-covered cunt?


Posted by pkcRAISTLIN on Aug-11-2008 03:19:

quote:
Originally posted by aNYthing
I just love hearing from Aussies fags like yourself and that PkcCretin "character". For kangoroo-banging bogans, you're quite involved in world affairs, while knowing JACK SHIT.


lol. ive forgotten more about politics than you'll ever know you ignorant little shit.


Posted by on Aug-11-2008 03:21:

quote:
Originally posted by aNYthing
I just love hearing from Aussies fags like yourself and that PkcCretin "character". For kangoroo-banging bogans, you're quite involved in world affairs, while knowing JACK SHIT.

These people ARE different from me. Explain how I am more of a twat than an AK-47 strapped russki soldier? I'm not wishing death on Ossetians - their pawn goverment made that choice for their people by being a pawn in Russia's game of politics and settling scores. I lived in the area that was FUCKED by Russians (in every meaning of the word) for over 300 years... So forgive me if I don't get all sentimental over dead russian soldiers who have no fucking business being in a land they have no claim to.

Fucking hypocrites run and point fingers at Israel (which, by the way, has more rights to the land they "occupy") while doing even worse in Georgia. You wanna see ethnic cleansing? Take a look at what those russian fucktards are doing to GEORGIA before you call me a twat, ok, ya puss-covered cunt?




Posted by aNYthing on Aug-11-2008 03:23:

quote:
Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
lol. ive forgotten more about politics than you'll ever know you ignorant little shit.


I'm by no means little. I am actually in a process of taking a shit bigger than you. Shame this amnesia did not spread to your ability to turn on computer, type, or fucking breathe. Go play in traffic, idiot.


Pages (17): « 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 »

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.