Нуклеарна војна, и загрижувачкиот тренд на неразбирање на последиците од истата

[Marquess]

Сеа само што падна една нуклеарка у карпош 4 ради дронов амерички

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

 

[Vanlok]

ова им е одговор што пред неколку дена B-52 што симулираа масовен напад со крстосувачки ракети на Санкт Петерсбург.

Прв пат слушам. Зафатен сум деновиве и еден куп работи сум пропуштил (дури и она со пропаѓањето на банките и почетокот на економскиот колапс).

Автоматски споено мислење: 15 март 2023

Oва изгледа.

https://min.news/en/military/b4fc8c894f7d530dd548141f5100fd5a.html

Let's Have A Look At B-52's Mission Over The Baltics And Close To Russia Yesterday

During its sortie the B-52 got closer to St. Petersburg and Kaliningrad than ever seen before on flight tracking websites. On Mar. 12, 2023, one of the

theaviationist.com

 

[Ska Maniac]

Прв пат слушам. Зафатен сум деновиве и еден куп работи сум пропуштил (дури и она со пропаѓањето на банките и почетокот на економскиот колапс).

Автоматски споено мислење: 15 март 2023

Oва изгледа.

Let's Have A Look At B-52's Mission Over The Baltics And Close To Russia Yesterday

During its sortie the B-52 got closer to St. Petersburg and Kaliningrad than ever seen before on flight tracking websites. On Mar. 12, 2023, one of the

theaviationist.com

https://min.news/en/military/b4fc8c894f7d530dd548141f5100fd5a.html

Тоа со банките мене повеќе ме загрижува. Големиве на светов ќе му исценираат нова голема депресија и ете конечно може да почне 3та светска војна. Веќе на пола пат се со планот да се прикаже дека на светов има недостаток од храна и дека ваљда ќе треба да се намали човештвово. Секако тоа ќе се случи со "хуман геноцид" преку "случајна светска војна" .

 

[Vanlok]

Мислам дека краткорочно гледано, нема да има ништо големо на економски план. Дека некогаш мора да се случи - мора, ама сеуште имаат контрола и едноставно не им одговара моментов со актуелниве геополитички настани... Се разбира и спротивното е исто толку веројатно, којзнае што друго се дешава без да знаеме.

Туку има и други моменти што загрижуваат, на пример настани што може да се протолкуваат како нуклеарен напад и да испровоцираат нуклеарна војна. На пример се зборува дека месецов наводно имало соларна ерупција на „Carrington level“. За среќа од другата страна на сонцето, не на страната што свртена кон земјата. Таква ерупција е доволно силна за уништување на телекомуникации, електродистибутивна мрежа и секаква техника и опрема, на страната од планетата која е во моментот свртена кон Сонцето. Такви ерупции се случуваат ретко ама се случуваат. Последен забележан историски пример е од 19-ти век.

Не можев да најдам ништо конкретно, освен ова долу кое не знам дали е поврзано:

Sun Releases Strong Solar Flare – Solar Cycle 25

blogs.nasa.gov

Поентата е што тогаш во моментот локално нема да има телекомуникации и може настанот да се протолкува како EMP напад. И да се деси ескалација и враќање на непостоечки напад.

 

[Ingvar]

Тоа со банките мене повеќе ме загрижува. Големиве на светов ќе му исценираат нова голема депресија и ете конечно може да почне 3та светска војна. Веќе на пола пат се со планот да се прикаже дека на светов има недостаток од храна и дека ваљда ќе треба да се намали човештвово. Секако тоа ќе се случи со "хуман геноцид" преку "случајна светска војна" .

Такви проекции има само една група на луѓе у моментов на земјава, а тоа се оние кои владеат со колективниот запад. Неоконс, окултна олигархија, длабока држава....кажи ги како сакаш. Нивната филозофија на размислување е милитантна и нивните цели сакаат да ги стекнат преку WW3 против Русија и Кина. А наградата за нив е Сибир.
Ова го зборам година дена, може некој мисли дека е сулуда идеја која нивните мали мозочиња у стаклено ѕвоно не ни можат да ја замислат, ама сé не води натака. Од напуштањето на ABM и инсталацијата на противракетен штит на САД у Европа до напуштањето на INF и како за крај ова со Украина, каде Русија е директно нападната од САД. Русија не е сама у ова и гледаме ескалација и со Кина, така да војнава ќе биде на два фронта. Англо-саксонската доминација со светов доаѓа при крај и како тоа се случува така повеќе побеснуваат. И како ќе им се руши цел систем така се повеќе сулуди одлуки ќе донесуваат, и како што се покажале низ историјата дека кур ги боли за луѓето и едноставно кажано немаат ни една света работа, можеме да претпоставиме што ќе се случи.
Да веруваме у доброто, и да веруваме дека барем еден паметен ќе се најде што нема да не отера 5000 год. на назад.

 

[Ska Maniac]

Ако толку се глупи цел свет да падне во телекомуникациски мрак и да мислат дека е саботажа или напад со ЕМП не заслужуваме ни да живееме.
Башка сигурно уште имаат аналогни линии на комуникација што ваљда нема да бидат погодени од ова.

Автоматски споено мислење: 15 март 2023

Такви проекции има само една група на луѓе у моментов на земјава, а тоа се оние кои владеат со колективниот запад. Неоконс, окултна олигархија, длабока држава....кажи ги како сакаш. Нивната филозофија на размислување е милитантна и нивните цели сакаат да ги стекнат преку WW3 против Русија и Кина. А наградата за нив е Сибир.
Ова го зборам година дена, може некој мисли дека е сулуда идеја која нивните мали мозочиња у стаклено ѕвоно не ни можат да ја замислат, ама сé не води натака. Од напуштањето на ABM и инсталацијата на противракетен штит на САД у Европа до напуштањето на INF и како за крај ова со Украина, каде Русија е директно нападната од САД. Русија не е сама у ова и гледаме ескалација и со Кина, така да војнава ќе биде на два фронта. Англо-саксонската доминација со светов доаѓа при крај и како тоа се случува така повеќе побеснуваат. И како ќе им се руши цел систем така се повеќе сулуди одлуки ќе донесуваат, и како што се покажале низ историјата дека кур ги боли за луѓето и едноставно кажано немаат ни една света работа, можеме да претпоставиме што ќе се случи.
Да веруваме у доброто, и да веруваме дека барем еден паметен ќе се најде што нема да не отера 5000 год. на назад.

Тесла ли беше што рекол дека третата светска војна ќе почне како конвенционална а ќе заврши како нуклеарна а четвртата ќе биде со камења и стапови ?

Нострадамус истово го кажува на сличен начин со исти последици. Башка и напоменува за богатствата од Сибир што ќе го одведат светот во хаос.

 

[Vanlok]

Башка сигурно уште имаат аналогни линии на комуникација што ваљда нема да бидат погодени од ова.

https://www.history.com/news/a-perfect-solar-superstorm-the-1859-carrington-event

https://www.space.com/the-carrington-event

„The Carrington Event sparked a huge geomagnetic storm that wreaked havoc with technology. Earth fell silent as telegraph communications around the world failed. “


Според искуствата од 1859-та, тогаш изгореле дебели телеграфски кабли. Денес со поефикасни стандарди се употребуваат потенки кабли. Па сега ти види.

На страна што дури и без нуклеарна војна тоа би бил скоро па апокалиптичен настан. Ќе се прекине ланецот на достава и трговија со храна, ќе го снема платежниот систем освен кеш (а кој чува многу кеш дома). Итн. Но главниот проблем за кој зборуваме е дека во таква хипотетична ситуација во моментот некој локален офицер (на нуклеарните силоси) ќе одлучува, и без основни информации дека се десил solar flare а не EMP напад. Во ситуација кога САД ти симулираат нуклеарни напади врз Санкт Петерсбург, Русија... Свашта е можно, за жал.

 

[Vanlok]

Russia To Complete Infrastructure For Poseidon-Capable Nuclear Submarine Fleet By 2024

Russia's TASS news agency reported this week that, according to the Russian Defense Ministry, infrastructure development plans for updated Pacific fleet nuclear submarine operations are set to be completed in early 2024. Pacific operations, once considered a long neglected element of Russia's navy, have been undergoing a revamp since 2015 under orders from the Kremlin. The completion of base improvements coincides with the reported deployment of Russia's new Poseidon super torpedoes, which were also commissioned in 2015.
Though TASS is often accused of acting as a propaganda platform for the Russian government, developments on the Poseidon torpedo are confirmed by multiple sources including the US Department of Defense and Congress.

The first delivery of Poseidon torpedoes was officially announced in January of 2023, and dummy rounds were tested in the arctic around the same time period. The weapons, which some sources refer to as “terrifying Apocalypse torpedoes” are 65ft long, though estimates greatly vary on the nuclear yield of the weapons. Some experts argue the Poseidon could carry a 2 megaton warhead, others argue that it is capable of carrying up to a 100 megaton yield. A 2 megaton warhead would be 100 times the explosive power of the bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in WWII.





But what makes the Poseidon more dangerous than the average nuke? Data on the device is limited, but the torpedoes are suspected to be a mixture of missile and drone technology. They carry a nuclear powered propulsion engine and can travel 80 miles per hour underwater (making countermeasures difficult). To give a sense of the speed, the average US nuclear submarine travels around 30 miles per hour (complete details are top secret), and the average US sub torpedo travels at around 57 miles per hour. In other words, catching and killing a Poseidon torpedo would be almost impossible.

The Poseidon system functions essentially as a fast roaming autonomous underwater nuke which can stalk an enemy coast for long distances until it is ordered to strike a particular target.





The Poseidon is not considered a first-strike weapon because of its design, but is instead meant to act as a post-attack trump card. Meaning, even if a large number of Russian nuclear launch facilities were destroyed in a first strike, and even if Russian subs were countered, Russia would still have the Poseidon torpedoes traveling under the oceans waiting to hit targets in an evolving battle-space, acting independently of their submarine fleet. By extension, if US or European defenses improved to intercept standard ICBMs, the Poseidon would still be able to deliver nuclear payloads to coastal targets.

That said, there is first strike potential for the weapons given their speed and the relative difficulty of defense against them. They can be used, not as a direct strike system, but as an indirect system by exploding just off the coast of a target city, creating a 500 foot radioactive tidal wave. They can also be used as a cavitation weapon that wipes out entire carrier battle-groups.

US Defense Department estimates suggest that Russia is constructing or refitting at least four nuclear subs to carry the large torpedoes, and that at least 30 Poseidons are being built. The latest news of the coming completion of infrastructure for Pacific bases suggests these preparations are almost finished.
With the war in Ukraine continuing unabated and the country acting as a veritable proxy for NATO, the question of nuclear conflict between the West and Russia has been entertained often. While it's unlikely that a nuclear exchange would benefit either side in any measurable way, the potential is ever present. With Belarus apparently ready to establish Russian tactical nuke sites within their borders this year and Vladimir Zelensky admitting this week that Ukraine is “out of ammo”, one has to wonder how the conflict will escalate in the coming months.

https://www.zerohedge.com/military/russia-complete-infrastructure-poseidon-capable-nuclear-submarine-fleet-2024

 

[Vanlok]

Коментар:

Yeah... and from what I've read is that its main scary feature is not how fast it can go... but how slow.

Apparently it has a "creeping" mode, where it travels at walking speed, a few miles an hour, during which it is completely undetectable. It can "creep" towards its target this way for months and then when it's close enough it "engages the warp drive" for that 80mph dash which makes it light up on all detectors but you can do f-all to stop it.

A real bastard of a vengeance weapon, tbf. Revenge is a dish best served cold - I'd bet the Russians invented that expression. Imagine, war is over, you win you lose, there's peace, doesn't matter - months pass by, you wonder whether some got launched, where they are, perhaps they'd arrive by now, they'd sure arrive by now... You finally start relaxing and then...

 

[Vanlok]

 

[Vanlok]

Why Is the US Wiring Ukraine With Radiation Sensors to Detect Nuclear Blasts? | naked capitalism

US officials tell the NYT the system will be able to determine who was responsible for an attack, but the details are sketchy.

www.nakedcapitalism.com

Why Is The US Wiring Ukraine With Radiation Sensors To Detect Nuclear Blasts?

The New York Times had quite the interesting piece buried in its science section on April 28. Titled “U.S. Wires Ukraine With Radiation Sensors to Detect Nuclear Blasts,” it claims sensors “can detect‌‌ bursts of radiation from a nuclear weapon or a dirty bomb and can confirm the identity of the attacker.” More:

In part, the goal is to make sure that if Russia detonates a radioactive weapon on Ukrainian soil, its atomic signature and Moscow’s culpability could be verified.
Ever since Russia invaded Ukraine 14 months ago, experts have worried about whether President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia would use nuclear arms in combat for the first time since the American bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945.

First off, what would possibly be the Russian rationale for using nuclear weapons?
They’re winning in Ukraine, and the West is running out of ammo.

Second, about those “experts.” To expand on their worries, the Times links to an October piece titled “Russia’s Small Nuclear Arms: A Risky Option for Putin and Ukraine Alike.” In it, we get this:

The primary utility, many U.S. officials say, would be as part of a last-ditch effort by Mr. Putin to halt the Ukrainian counteroffensive, by threatening to make parts of Ukraine uninhabitable. The officials spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe some of the most sensitive discussions inside the administration.

So the experts are anonymous. Who is running this operation? The Nuclear Emergency Support Team (NEST), which is the Nation Nuclear Security Administration’s arm that deals with emergency response functions. The Times also notes the following:

Jeffrey T. Richelson, author of “Defusing Armageddon,” a 2009 book on the Nuclear Emergency Support Team, reported that it often teamed up with the Joint Special Operations Command, an elite military unit so secretive that the Pentagon for years refused to acknowledge its existence.

The Times’ April 28 piece gets more bonkers from there. There’s this:

Public knowledge of such defensive planning, nuclear experts say, can deter Moscow by letting it know that Washington can expose what is called a false-flag operation.
For instance, Moscow could falsely claim that Kyiv set off a nuclear blast on the battlefield to try to draw the West into deeper war assistance. But in theory, with the sensor network in place, Washington would be able to point to its own nuclear attribution analyses to reveal that Moscow was in fact the attacker.

So Russia would conduct a false-flag operation in order to risk accomplishing what Kiev would want to accomplish with its own false flag?
Again, what would Moscow have to gain? It’s steadily winning the war and depleting western stockpiles.
But for the inhabitants of the alternate universe where Russia is on its last legs it all makes perfect sense. Speaking to that audience, the Times again invokes “nuclear experts” and “western experts” who are presumably the same aforementioned anonymous officials, and they put an ominous spin on Ukraine’s coming counteroffensive:

Nuclear experts say such defensive precautions could face their greatest test in coming weeks as the Ukrainian army launches its spring offensive. China has leaned on Russia to discontinue its nuclear saber rattling and Mr. Putin has not recently invoked a nuclear threat. But Western experts worry that Russia’s battlefield failures are making Mr. Putin, if anything, more dependent on his nuclear arsenal, and they worry that fresh setbacks could increase his willingness to pull the nuclear trigger.

One of the many alarming aspects of all this is that these “experts” certainly must know that the idea “that Russia’s battlefield failures are making Mr. Putin, if anything, more dependent on his nuclear arsenal” is complete fantasy, yet they’re peddling it anyways. Why? That’s an ominous thought.
Russia was warning NATO back in October that Ukraine might detonate a “dirty bomb” and blame Moscow. Washington, Paris, and London dismissed it all as “transparently false.” Instead the West has continued to insist that Moscow might do so. The Basic Principles of State Policy of the Russian Federation on Nuclear Deterrence state that Russia would not use a nuclear weapon of any kind unless the country is attacked using weapons of mass destruction or faces a conventional attack so severe it threatens the country’s existence.
Could Kiev create a dirty bomb? The US GAO admits it’s not hard to find the materials and build a dirty bomb. Ukraine returned all its Soviet-era nuclear weapons to Russia in the 1990, but still has stockpiles of weapons-grade uranium and plutonium. Dirty bombs can also be made out of byproducts from nuclear power plants of which Ukraine has several. According to Russia, it would be no problem for Kiev to build such a weapon:

Russian Radiation, Chemical and Biological Defense Troops chief Igor Kirillov warned that Ukraine has the technological prowess and ample radioactive material reserves to build a dirty bomb. This includes some 1,500 tons’ worth of spent nuclear fuel from the country’s three operating nuclear power plants, and 22,000 spent fuel assemblies stored at the defunct Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant’s waste repositories, including Uranium-235 and Plutnoium-239 – the primary fissile isotopes used in nuclear weapons.
…Furthermore, the officer stressed, Kiev has the scientific know-how allowing it to easily build a dirty bomb, including the legendary Kharkov Institute of Physics and Technology involved in the creation of the Soviet Union’s nuclear weapons, and the Ukrainian Academy of Sciences’ Institute for Nuclear Research, which operates the BBP-M research reactor.

The Times’ piece has virtually no information on what the deployed sensors actually do. Presumably they would detect radiation and then a forensics team would try to determine the origin of the weapon. Thing is, there are already institutions for that.
The European Radiological Data Exchange Platform, which monitors radiation levels, already covers Ukraine. According to its website, it “consists of data exchange mechanism and presentation website for radiological monitoring data which is collected and shared by 39 participating countries in almost REAL TIME.” But it is not a rapid alert system, and while the EU has one of those, it only covers member states.
The IAEA, on the other hand has its EMERCON system for radiological or nuclear emergencies and which does cover Ukraine. And the IAEA can help prepare for the investigation into a nuclear incident:

The IAEA supports States in developing technical capabilities by providing: Technical assistance, including, upon request, to prepare for the conduct of a nuclear forensics examination in the context of the investigation of a nuclear security event. Important considerations involve procedures to collect and preserve evidence and properly sequence non-destructive ahead of destructive analysis in the laboratory.

Additionally, the IAEA notes that there are international organizations that provide various forms of nuclear forensic support, including the Global Initiative to Combat Nuclear Terrorism, INTERPOL, and the Nuclear Forensics International Technical Working Group. But the US apparently does not want to rely on these international institutions.
The US is apparently going with its own team. So should such a weapon be used in Ukraine, would the US Nuclear Emergency Support Team be able to determine who did it? It’s hard to tell – but probably not with any certainty.
The Times piece has few details on how the process works, saying only that it developed rapidly after 9/11, has some secrets, and “its outlines are publicly known.”
The Times then links back to two articles – one from 2004 and another from 2006. They’re fairly similar and both describe the process of identification this way:

The basic science relies on faint clues — tiny bits of radioactive fallout, often invisible to the eye, that under intense scrutiny can reveal distinctive signatures. Such wisps of evidence can help identify an exploded bomb’s type and characteristics, including its country of origin.

While tracking a missile from the blastoff point is not difficult, tracking unconventional devices, such as a dirty bomb that uses ordinary explosives to spew radioactivity, can be a major challenge. Both articles described “federal experts” participating in drills to establish the origin of a weapon. From the 2004 piece:

In a drill this year, dozens of federal experts in fallout analysis met at the Sandia laboratories in Albuquerque to study a simulated terrorist nuclear blast. Mr. Worlton said they were broken into teams and given radiological data from two old American nuclear tests, whose identities remained hidden, and were instructed to try to name them. Some teams succeeded, he said.

While hyping that apparent success, the 2004 piece noted that success was only partial. The Times also mentioned that there were numerous complexities involved that made attribution less of a sure thing, including “that knowing who made a bomb may say little about who detonated it.” And there’s this:

Experts agree that such detective work can prove difficult. For years, the International Atomic Energy Agency has struggled with limited success to identify the source of highly enriched uranium, a potential bomb fuel, found by the agency’s inspectors on Iranian nuclear gear.

According to the IAEA, forensic investigations are rarely slam dunk cases:

Nuclear forensic analysis and interpretation involve a deductive and iterative process, as depicted in Fig. 2. Implementing the analytical plan produces results that can be compared with information on existing or known materials, and such comparisons lead to interpretation, which puts the analytical results into context. The comparative process involving analytical results and known material information is iterative because each successive comparison may provide new information that can identify further analyses or comparisons that, in turn, may uncover additional signatures that will help to identify the material more precisely.
This comparative process may also be deductive because it can be used to progressively exclude particular processes, locations or other origins as possible sources of the material. For example, comparisons of analytical results from seized nuclear material with known production processes will identify likely production processes that could have made the seized material, as well as those processes that could not have made the seized material. Additional comparisons with other existing production processes or analytical measurements will serve to narrow the list of likely production processes responsible for the production of the seized material.

Fig. 2
But American officials claimed in the Times articles from 2004 and 2006 that scientific advancements were being made in the US, which would make identification more accurate.

Have they advanced enough? And maybe the real question is, who would trust the US’ conclusion? Would it matter?

Dr. Jay C. Davis, a nuclear scientist who helped found the Pentagon’s part of the US effort to trace an explosion, told the Times back in 2004 that the identification effort would be crucial in ”dealing with the desire for instant gratification through vengeance.”

 

[Vanlok]

Втората вест испорака на storm shadow со долг домет
(извозна верзија околу 250км а другата околу 520км домет)
Ваквиот потез од страна на Бритите велат дека е со одбрение од САДистите.
Одговорот на Москва на ваквиот потез може само да се претпостави, бидејќи ако укронациве испалат ваков проектил кон Москва ... нема да знаат каква боева глава се додека истата не детонира, можно цели за овие ракети се и аердромските пристаништа со стратешка авијација, и затоа одговорот на Москва станува проблематичен... како што реков во еден момент Москва ќе мора да покаже заби (можеби некаков асиметричен одговор со конвенционално) и да уништи воена цел на ОТАН, а потоа се е во сферата на можното.
(картата на која Москва игра да се сочекаат -избори 2024 во САД- е изгледа прочитана и ќе мора да се бара ново излезно решение)

Ова за жал мислам дека би била ескалација на која не може да си дозволат да не одговорат - и не по самарот туку по магарето... И понатаму господ да не чува сите.

 

[Vanlok]

 

[Ingvar]

Просто и едноставно, јенкиве се отидени начисто со памет.

 

[Vanlok]