JayBeeWell it takes a bit more than that, but half a day is possible for basic employment sure. For one thing you have to effectively "cock" a Stinger. This involves activating the battery for eight seconds, this powers up the control circuitry, it also releases coolant to chill the infrared seeker of the missile, you then have a finite amount of time in which you can fire the missile. If you did not get a shot off, because let's say the aircraft turned sharply and never came close enough. You have to replace the battery pack and make all the connections to the sight and to the missile, of course the easy way is to just throw it away and demand a replacement. After all its not your $175,000.
It only took me 10-15 min to learn how to fire it. And heck there are even step by step YOUTUBE videos on how to fire it. You make it sound like a big deal.....it's not after a very short training period. Maybe I have been under rating myself all this time when I think I am an average person.
I think your misunderstanding complexity on the Harpoon as well because we are intending to supply them with very little training and certainly not 90 days of training more like a few days at most. You should listen to the news in more detail. You might just find some training manuals on the mobile system on the internet, maybe not the Navy is somewhat careful.
The deal on the S400 was to swap Turkeys for Patriot and give Turkey's to Ukraine to bring Turkey back in compliance with NATO expectations.
The Corvette would not be built from scratch new at a naval yard obviously, there are plenty of them already built.
A geopolitical commentator that I follow is Peter Zeihan, his current take on the Russo-Ukrainian war is here, note that it is fairly short
Zeihan on Geopolitics
He is an interesting commentator but given his training and past record on predictions, I wouldn't place much confidence in his crystal ball re Ukraine.
JayBeeA geopolitical commentator that I follow is Peter Zeihan, his current take on the Russo-Ukrainian war is here, note that it is fairly short Zeihan on Geopolitics
Very Interesting!
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
It's called nuclear deterrence. That's how they'd be used to hopefully help prevent Russian from invading Poland in the first place. Pretty clear cut concept that's been long established.
And if Poland thinks the presence of nuclear weapons on their territory would deter Russia from an invasion that they feel is a real risk, why the heck would they not want that and instead choose a conventional war to break out on their territory with all of NATO going up against Russia? Strange logic on your part to think WWIII is somehow preferable to a mere threat.
One is viewed as not a real risk of using nuclear weapons, as seen by the Cold War where just the threat was enough to hold both factions in check (Although the hope is that Russia views the threat as more than just an idle one). If Poland wants the west to station nuclear weapons on their territory, it's because they're counting on that to still hold true in the 21st century (Which may or may not be a huge mistake, given doubts over Putin's sanity).
But allow a full fledged war to break out and you can pretty much bet that nuclear weapons of some fashion will be brought into use, risking the potential of their use past just as tactical nuclear weapons in the theater where the fighting is taking place.
BTW, I do not believe that Putin was misinformed and does not know what the status is in Ukraine. I think that is more Russian propaganda in an attempt to partially rebuild his reputation and point the finger at others. Putin was on the ground with bino's during the invasion of Georgia and he stated then the Military did not perform all that well. Possibly with intervening operations he might have been led astray about his military capabilities but I have my doubts he is completely ignorant of what is going on now in Ukraine and think he is getting the info in close to real time as well as directly ordering some of the atrocities.
Too much in his history for me to buy into the line that he has no idea what is happening in Ukraine. He is not that stupid and has a history of double checking what people tell him or seeing for himself. Likewise the Olympics at Sochi he flew there and personally inspected the construction and progress being made.
Leo_Ames It's called nuclear deterrence. That's how they'd be used to hopefully help prevent Russian from invading Poland in the first place. Pretty clear cut concept that's been long established. And if Poland thinks the presence of nuclear weapons on their territory would deter Russia from an invasion that they feel is a real risk, why the heck would they not want that and instead choose a conventional war to break out on their territory with all of NATO going up against Russia? Strange logic on your part to think WWIII is somehow preferable to a mere threat. One is viewed as not a real risk of using nuclear weapons, as seen by the Cold War where just the threat was enough to hold both factions in check (Although the hope is that Russia views the threat as more than just an idle one). If Poland wants the west to station nuclear weapons on their territory, it's because they're counting on that to still hold true in the 21st century (Which may or may not be a huge mistake, given doubts over Putin's sanity). But allow a full fledged war to break out and you can pretty much bet that nuclear weapons of some fashion will be brought into use, risking the potential of their use past just as tactical nuclear weapons in the theater where the fighting is taking place.
CMStPnP BTW, I do not believe that Putin was misinformed and does not know what the status is in Ukraine. I think that is more Russian propaganda in an attempt to partially rebuild his reputation and point the finger at others. Putin was on the ground with bino's during the invasion of Georgia and he stated then the Military did not perform all that well. Possibly with intervening operations he might have been led astray about his military capabilities but I have my doubts he is completely ignorant of what is going on now in Ukraine and think he is getting the info in close to real time as well as directly ordering some of the atrocities. Too much in his history for me to buy into the line that he has no idea what is happening in Ukraine. He is not that stupid and has a history of double checking what people tell him or seeing for himself. Likewise the Olympics at Sochi he flew there and personally inspected the construction and progress being made.
Back then he was active and highly visible. For a year or more he has been mostly in isolation.
charlie hebdoBack then he was active and highly visible. For a year or more he has been mostly in isolation.
That being the case I wonder what his health status is?
Not his mental health mind you, his physical health.
Of course there's no way of anyone outside of his inner circle knowing. Barring leaks anything would be sheer speculation.
Flintlock76 charlie hebdo Back then he was active and highly visible. For a year or more he has been mostly in isolation. That being the case I wonder what his health status is? Not his mental health mind you, his physical health. Of course there's no way of anyone outside of his inner circle knowing. Barring leaks anything would be sheer speculation.
charlie hebdo Back then he was active and highly visible. For a year or more he has been mostly in isolation.
Read an article someplace - reportedly a Western Cancer Doctor has made 35 or more trips to Moscow in the past year or so to treat him. Of course there is no announcement about what he is being treated for.
The pictures we have been provided in the past several months show, for whatever the reason, he doesn't want to be near ANYONE in meetings with people.
EuclidI am only asking about the strategy for arming Poland with nukes. I don’t see a clear course that is completely logical.
It's well established policy that has been in place for half a century or more in several countries (And has been discussed earlier in this thread).
The US would retain ownership and control of the weapons, with them released for use by the Polish Air Force for delivery to their targets only with US authorization in the event of what likely would end up WWIII.
EuclidIn Putin’s mind, how many nukes would Poland need in order to deter Russia from invading?
He's not saying, so nobody knows.
EuclidIf NATO countries could deter all aggression by each having nukes, why don’t they all have them?
Three of them do. And via US nuclear sharing, several others have access to nucelar bombs in the event of war.
As for why more of them don't, many factors are behind that. I'll list a few that leap to mind.
United States, Great Britain and France are NATO's nuclear deterence.
Other countries in the nuclear weapon "club" so far include Russia, China, India and Pakistan.
Israel is unconfirmed but suspected of having nuclear weapons.
Next up will be Iran if another deal is signed.
Followed by North Korea.
If those two countries go nuclear you will see Japan, South Korea and Saudi Arabia go nuclear as well as probably Indonesia and Australia, and possibly Brazil.
Leo_Ames Euclid I am only asking about the strategy for arming Poland with nukes. I don’t see a clear course that is completely logical. It's well established policy that has been in place for half a century or more in several countries (And has been discussed earlier in this thread).
Euclid I am only asking about the strategy for arming Poland with nukes. I don’t see a clear course that is completely logical.
Euclid Leo_Ames Euclid I am only asking about the strategy for arming Poland with nukes. I don’t see a clear course that is completely logical. The basis of that question is, what would Poland do if they had independent nuclear deterrence and Putin invaded them while using conventional warfare? My bet is that Poland and/or NATO would not respond with nuclear weapons, and that Putin knows that. In that case there would be no nuclear deterrence or not enough to prevent an invasion. Nuclear deterrence depends on all parties being rational. But now we have an irrational party with 8000 nuclear warheads capable of attacking anywhere in the world. Therefore, in this case, the effective nuclear deterrence would be working for Putin, not for Poland. Another element of the question about Poland getting nuclear weapons is this: Why would Poland need nuclear weapons if NATO’s collective defense would protect Poland with its collective nuclear defense? Another part of the question is this: Suppose Russia invaded Poland with conventional warfare, and Poland, having nuclear weapons, decided to use them to stop the invasion. In general terms, how many, of what power, would they use; and where would they target them?
Leo_Ames Euclid I am only asking about the strategy for arming Poland with nukes. I don’t see a clear course that is completely logical.
BackshopYou need to read replies to your questions. Poland would not have nuclear weapons. There would be nuclear weapons on Polish soil under American control. Just like Germany does and Turkey used to.
The main reason why Isreal survived besides having a 1st rate airforce and ground pounders that could defeat an army 5 times their size that invaded it was they made it clear that they could and would turn any nation that did overrun them into self lighting glass floored parking lots along with their allies at the same time. They have had the tech since the early 60's. Now as for Russia trying to overrun NATO. In the 80's NASA released several pictures taken by satalites that showed underground aquifers around Eygpt. Those were taken to shown just how advanced our satalites where at the time. Just imagine how much more advanced they are 40 years later. We have also devoloped a new generation of bunker busting bombs based off the 61 type nuclear weapon. These things are designed for one job to destroy any bunker known to exsist. It is said a pair of them based on the models can destroy a bunker 1500meters below groundlevel. That is almost a mile below ground level. Do you think there is a place in the world where a leader can hide that those could not be dropped on their heads via B2's and not be seen. Now we won't be the first to let that genie out of the bottle however if it was ever let loose you can bet we would hammer as hard if not harder than our enemies.
Euclid Backshop You need to read replies to your questions. Poland would not have nuclear weapons. There would be nuclear weapons on Polish soil under American control. Just like Germany does and Turkey used to. Where did I say otherwise? The premise of my questions is based on the video above saying that Poland has asked for nuclear weapons to defend against an invasion by Russia. I assume they mean having nuclear weapons on their soil and under their control. If that is not the case, and they are just referring to nuclear weapons within NATO and under U.S. control, why would they be asking for that when they already have it?
Backshop You need to read replies to your questions. Poland would not have nuclear weapons. There would be nuclear weapons on Polish soil under American control. Just like Germany does and Turkey used to.
Euclid. If that is not the case, and they are just referring to nuclear weapons within NATO and under U.S. control, why would they be asking for that when they already have it?
I'm basically staying out of this, but it seems clear that the 'nuclear weapons' that would be used by Poland would be used only well within Poland, in the same way and for the same purpose ER (neutron) weapons would have been used for concerted armored attack through the Fulda Gap.
The sole purpose being to deter any major Soviet incursion into Polish territory (probably with the 'excuse' of interdicting weapons transfers to Ukraine, but it might be amusing to see what those pariah liars actually use).
The idea of a 'false flag' attack by Russian forces using their tactical munitions, masquerading as a Ukrainian atrocity, is a concern. I do not know if the nuclear signature of weapons deployed in Soviet times in Ukraine differs from what current Russian forces might attempt to utilize.
Ukraine doesn't have any nukes.
JayBee Euclid . If that is not the case, and they are just referring to nuclear weapons within NATO and under U.S. control, why would they be asking for that when they already have it? The Poles want the nuclear weapons on their soil for two reasons, first because the Germans may veto the use of nuclear weapons based on German soil until Germany is directly affected, meaning Poland has fallen. Second the US will not base nuclear weapons on Polish soil without a much larger troop presence than there currently is in Poland. If you had watched the Peter Zeihan video I linked they will want that nuclear deterence based east of Warsaw to bolster the idea in Putin's mind that "What ever it takes to keep Russia from taking any part of Poland" is the plan.
Euclid . If that is not the case, and they are just referring to nuclear weapons within NATO and under U.S. control, why would they be asking for that when they already have it?
Euclid I can’t imagine any NATO country using a nuke as first strike against a country that is aggressing by means of conventional warfare.
Heh, you don't have to imagine. How and why were they used in the past? President Truman had a decision in front of him. On one hand was use of Nukes with potentially devastating casualties on the other hand was what?
You can Google that answer.
Russia stated what the red line is for them which coincidently is also the same red line for the United States.
CMStPnP Euclid I can’t imagine any NATO country using a nuke as first strike against a country that is aggressing by means of conventional warfare. Heh, you don't have to imagine. How and why were they used in the past? President Truman had a decision in front of him. On one hand was use of Nukes with potentially devastating casualties on the other hand was what? You can Google that answer. Russia stated what the red line is for them which coincidently is also the same red line for the United States.
EuclidSay Poland had nukes intended to deter an invasion and Russia started an invasion of Poland with conventional weapons just like they did in Ukraine. What exactly would Poland do? I am looking for a detailed likely scenario.
One of the difficulties is the issue of fallout drifting across national boundaries -- something I expect the Putin machine to promptly consider reason for "retaliation" in kind. ER weapons in particular are a difficulty because (for example) they generate substantial monatomic carbon-14 -- radioactive, easily biologically-assimilated carbon -- in the volume in which the neutrons are active. This will likely get into the food chain and make living in the area downwind untenable for crops for much of the active lifetime of the carbon isotope... it's low-energy betas, but the carbon is assimilated in metabolism. I think you rapidly understand why this is considered a last-ditch alternative, only when excessive force of that particular type is applied.
I would expect considerable use of PGM, including various kinds of 'pop-up' guerilla-style weapons with penetrating, shaped-charge, or depleted-uranium heads, for any invasion less than overwhelming in concentration. I am not sure why we concentrated on <4kt settings on our theater 'dial-a-bombs' in the last few years: they don't interdict equipment or troops particularly well, and if they're intended to produce casualties of attrition, it's no different from the contraindicated use of chemical weapons as forbidden by the Geneva Convention.
Euclid I don’t think what happened then is at all applicable to the circumstances today. Answer me this: Say Poland had nukes intended to deter an invasion and Russia started an invasion of Poland with conventional weapons just like they did in Ukraine. What exactly would Poland do? I am looking for a detailed likely scenario.
Putin and the Russian military animals are clearly guilty of committing war crimes against civilians on a massive level. What, if anything, will the West do about it to prevent it happening again in Ukraine or punish?
JayBee Euclid I don’t think what happened then is at all applicable to the circumstances today. Answer me this: Say Poland had nukes intended to deter an invasion and Russia started an invasion of Poland with conventional weapons just like they did in Ukraine. What exactly would Poland do? I am looking for a detailed likely scenario. Ok let's assume that Russia has taken Ukraine by the end of the year, and let's assume they have devastated Ukraine's cities, driven much of the population as refugees into NATO countries and kidnapped much of the rest. It will be two or more years before the Russian Army is in any shape to move further west. By that time Poland is planning to have over one million people who have as much training as the new Russian conscripts have, in their reserves. Above all that they will have their regular army and other NATO forces. Russia will not be able to do much more than barely set foot on Polish soil before being crushed in a conventional fight.
I was told (6th post from top of page) that the reason Poland needed nukes was just for deterrance. The presense of nukes would deter Russia from attacking, and that would prevent a conventional war that would happen without the nukes deterring Russia. I was not conviced that would be the outcome.
I don't know what it is that you're looking for, Euclid. Russia's neighbors are scared and want to boost their security out of the fear they'll be next.
If Poland thinks one such avenue to help prevent any bloodshed is to enter into a nuclear sharing agreement with the USA that sees the Air Force station some B61's at a Polish Air Force base that would be delivered by F-16's or their future F-35's in the event that Russia invades, what exactly is the point of overthinking it?
It's clear cut what the hope is, there's no guarantees with any of these steps, nobody knows what's going on inside Putin's head, etc. They're simply trying to protect themselves to hopefully prevent war and are looking at all the options on the table that might boost their security and keep them from going through what the poor people of Ukraine are experiencing.
And if the bigwigs in Washington DC agree that it enhances European security, presumably it will happen in time (It won't be quick since for starters they don't have the tools to deliver them and probably wouldn't until their newly built F-35's start arriving down the road with the necessary modifications installed on the production line to do the job).
That's really all there is to it, lol...
charlie hebdo Putin and the Russian military animals are clearly guilty of committing war crimes against civilians on a massive level. What, if anything, will the West do about it to prevent it happening again in Ukraine or punish?
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.