Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
So what? Do you really believe that China, or Russia, or anyone else would take that risk?
Other than the fact that what you just wrote has absolutely nothing to do with the topic, OK?
Chiefs’ WR Tyreek Hill, listed as questionable for Sunday due to a quad injury, is expected to play vs. the WFT
Our weapon systems have the ability to defend us against some of the ICBMs by picking them off before they land. It is my understanding that we have no defense against a weapon of this nature at this time
The prosecution of the January 6 people is being performed by the Justice Department and local Washington authorities. Are you suggesting that the Justice Department should be dealing with our nuclear race with China?
We don’t have a defense against iCBMs. The SDS was a total waste of money and resources because if we can’t stop them all, then we can’t stop any of them. Hopefully we won’t be stupid enough to engage in yet another arms race.
We don’t need to spend it on hypersonic missiles with nuclear payloads. Spend it on weapons that will help us win small wars, not nuclear wars. We can afford to cut defense spending in half, and thus achieve most of the progressive agenda, including fighting climate change, which is obviously our #1 priority.
My whole point in this thread is that we cannot get that sort of disadvantage, because the bolded can never be true. Didn’t you ever see WarGames?
Defending some ICBMs doesn't really matter when enough still get through to destroy us 10x over. BTW...we probably have or are close to similar technology to do this to them as well.
Hunter probably sold some Happy Trees paintings to an “anonymous dealer” to make it go away.
is that something that actually happened, or did we just pretend it did to make an old deranged man happy? seems like they just stopped at ripping off the star trek logo.
Do you have a different....let's say "more politically neutral" link about this?
It changes the status quo. Assured mutual destruction has always kept the playing field level, this changes the game. At least for a little bit while the rest of us catch up.
Sorry It’s just not compelling. I’m not interested in the ins and outs of a tactical nuclear war. I don’t believe this changes the status quo at all. China will never engage in a nuclear battle with us because the risk to them is too great.
You're about 10 years too late for that, we've been working on one for as long as anyone else, China just got one to work before everybody else did. I agree that we can't get into another intercontinental arms race like we did with the Soviets. The thing is, we kinda wrote the playbook on that and now China is using it against us when our economy really doesn't have the ability to support it
What makes you think the Chinese leadership is not rational or mentally stable? You say the weirdest things.
And we will have spent trillions of dollars achieving nothing of value.
We don’t have that ability. We haven’t since 1945. We can’t get that ability, Ever. That’s why anything we spend on this is a waste of money.
