I’m like 70% sure the US and the USSR mutually agreed this was a bad idea
Oh yeah, signed a treaty. And everything.
Maybe google “Trump inf treaty”.
Damn that’s crazy
Just one more crazy thing he did to help Russia that no one in the general public remembers outside of news junkies. That’s all part of the “flood the zone” strategy that Bannon talks about (but it predates Bannon).
Donald Trump couldn’t find Ukraine on a map, but his first act on becoming presumptive nominee in 2016 was to force the Republican convention to remove its plank supporting Ukraine.
People who can’t see this just blow mind.
Starlink stock gonna take a hit on this one
Isn’t Starlink stock.
1.) Fractional Orbital Bombardment System
2.) Orbital nuclear weapons delivery platform
3.) New orbital ASAT capability
Take your pick they all fit.
X-37 nuclear installation platform
The number of times I’ve accidentally murdered my entire squad with an orbital strike in Helldivers tells me that would be a really bad idea.
Okay, good. So just the GOP trying to drum up a super scary distraction from their opposition to doing anything about the border or supporting America’s allies. I’m sure this is just as scary as that ‘East Coast destroying nuclear torpedo’ of theirs.
If anything this undercuts them opposing Ukraine aid. Russia is trying to escalate, so they clearly need to be shut down, and we conveniently have an Ally working to do that right now, an Ally that has a pending aid bill before that very chamber.
This might be the Republican plan. Russia breaking the “no nukes in space” rule, so now it’s okay to back Ukraine again. They don’t lose face, satisfy the large chunk of constituents that support what Ukraine is doing, and make their military donors happy.
I think that’s way more 4d chess than they are actually capable of, but if votes shift i’ll definitely give it to your take.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boeing_X-37
X-37 gonna booty touch whatever they put up
It’s such a badass thing and so few people even realize we have it or how it’s (probably) used.
Why does it matter if the nuclear weapon is in space or in some secret bunker (or on a plane or submarine, for that matter). It seems like one in space would be the easiest to monitor and intercept, if necessary, and also the least likely to kill anyone if it has a rapid unscheduled kaboom.
I get why we don’t want anyone testing nukes in space but I don’t think anyone besides North Korea has tested an actual nuclear weapon since the 90’s.
From a space delivery using a hyper sled you could be on target in 120 seconds. No time for any reaction.
EMP taking out global communication and GPS systems. Yeah, no big deal.
It’d be a big deal if they launched nuclear weapons from any platform. I’m not saying it’s a minor issue. I’m saying I don’t get why it’s more dangerous than other mutually assured destruction scenarios.
Look at it this way. What’s a bigger deal? A fox in the henhouse or a fox on the other side of the pasture in the sights of your rifle?
Hypothetically, a nuke platform in orbit could just lay waste to a massive amount of communication infrastructure. For Russia, operating in Europe, they can rely on encrypted radio comms from London to the Kremlin but the US is on the other side of the planet. US superiority is heavily reliant on things like satellite intelligence, remote guided ordinance, and a central command well back from the theatre of operations.
It would give Russia’s outdated crap military a huge leg up and level the playing field somewhat.
I’m not an expert so all that is just me freestyling but how does it sound? Does it sound like a threat to US military effectiveness in Europe?
Russia still has to contend with European armies but they have nukes that they could use tactically in the region. If it’s your home turf, you’ll surrender before risking that.
