ISIS ‘dirty bomb’ claims

Current news and it's political impact.

Re: ISIS ‘dirty bomb’ claims

Postby John Galt » Tue Jun 30, 2015 12:46 pm

Dylan wrote:
exploited wrote:
You can't defeat America with a dirty bomb. In fact, that is probably the shortest route to total annihilation imaginable.

It would be fascinating to watch though. I always hear about America's relative decline militarily but then the US unleashes a little bit and you realize.....damn. This thing is ridiculous. The capacity for destruction is neat to the mad monkey inside but it's also concerning.


this time it has declined (relatively). not to isis. oh god, lol they'd be gone so fast. but the us military technological advantage has declined relative to china and russia

http://www.economist.com/blogs/economis ... explains-9

    AMERICA'S ability to project power on behalf of its own interests and in defence of its allies has been the bedrock of the rules-based international order since the end of the second world war. Critical to that effort has been the role of technology in maintaining a military edge over potential adversaries through the first and second “offset strategies”. In the 1950s it offset the Soviet Union’s numerical advantage in conventional forces by accelerating its lead in nuclear weapons. From the late-1970s, after the Soviets closed the gap in nuclear capability, America began making investments in emerging technologies that led to the ability to “look deep and shoot deep” with precision guided munitions. For the next quarter of a century American military dominance was assured.

    Now, that decisive military edge is being eroded. Why?

    The same technologies that made America and the West militarily dominant have proliferated to potential foes. In particular, precision-guided missiles are widely and cheaply available. Rather than investing in the next generation of high-tech weapons to stay far ahead of military competitors, the Pentagon has been focused more on the very different demands of counter-insurgency operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.

    While America has been distracted, China has been busy developing asymmetric capabilities specifically designed to counter America’s power in the West Pacific. For over two decades it’s been investing double-digit defence budgets in an arsenal of highly-accurate, submarines, sophisticated integrated air defence systems (IADS) and advanced cyber capabilities. All with the aim of making it too dangerous for American carriers to operate close enough to fly their tactical aircraft or cruise missiles. The Chinese call it “winning a local war in high-tech conditions”.


http://www.economist.com/news/internati ... -years-big

The [Third Offset Strategy] programme needs to overcome at least five critical vulnerabilities. The first is that carriers and other surface vessels can now be tracked and hit by missiles at ranges from the enemy’s shore which could prevent the use of their cruise missiles or their tactical aircraft without in-flight refuelling by lumbering tankers that can be picked off by hostile fighters. The second is that defending close-in regional air bases from a surprise attack in the opening stages of a conflict is increasingly hard. Third, aircraft operating at the limits of their combat range would struggle to identify and target mobile missile launchers. Fourth, modern air defences can shoot down non-stealthy aircraft at long distances. Finally, the satellites America requires for surveillance and intelligence are no longer safe from attack.
Image
User avatar
John Galt
Technical Admin
 
Posts: 11343
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2012 3:22 pm
Location: Bowling Green Massacre Survivor
Gender: None specified
Has thanked: 530 times
Been thanked: 1167 times
Political Leaning: Classic Liberal

Re: ISIS ‘dirty bomb’ claims

Postby John Galt » Tue Jun 30, 2015 12:54 pm

Dylan wrote:
jimmyz wrote:I'd be more worried about meeting my end in these horrific ways at the hands of ISIS... WARNING-GRAPHIC content in video.

http://heavy.com/news/2015/06/isis-islamic-state-executes-drowns-in-cage-blows-up-spies-brutal-video-propaganda-uncensored-youtube-iraqi-espionage-men-killed/

dirk dirka dirka.

man that place looks awful. if i lived in a sandbox i'd probably be pretty pissed off too.

btw if we irradiate the whole subcontinent can we still drill for oil or......nah?


we could make robots to do it for us. then no one has to live there. bucketfuls of win
Image

These users thanked the author John Galt for the post:
Dylan
User avatar
John Galt
Technical Admin
 
Posts: 11343
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2012 3:22 pm
Location: Bowling Green Massacre Survivor
Gender: None specified
Has thanked: 530 times
Been thanked: 1167 times
Political Leaning: Classic Liberal

Re: ISIS ‘dirty bomb’ claims

Postby Dylan » Tue Jun 30, 2015 12:58 pm

It's challenging because we have to be prepared to fight simultaneous ground, sea and air wars on multiple fronts in a variety of conditions, whereas China just needs to prepare to fight one enemy in their backyard. And they are reverse engineering against the more advanced defense power - i.e., we dream up the cool shit and they dream up much less cool shit (cheaper too) to counteract our super cool shit.

As any PCFer knows, it's always easier to poke holes in something somebody else created than it is to create something yourself.

All in all though I'm confident we would win any conventional war against China in any theater. Our military is still far more advanced and we have a significantly stronger military tradition that counts for a lot.
Image
User avatar
Dylan
Vice President
 
Posts: 10741
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2012 1:34 pm
Gender: None specified
Has thanked: 1038 times
Been thanked: 916 times
Political Leaning: Middle of the Road

Re: ISIS ‘dirty bomb’ claims

Postby John Galt » Tue Jun 30, 2015 1:04 pm

Dylan wrote:It's challenging because we have to be prepared to fight simultaneous ground, sea and air wars on multiple fronts in a variety of conditions, whereas China just needs to prepare to fight one enemy in their backyard. And they are reverse engineering against the more advanced defense power - i.e., we dream up the cool shit and they dream up much less cool shit (cheaper too) to counteract our super cool shit.

As any PCFer knows, it's always easier to poke holes in something somebody else created than it is to create something yourself.

All in all though I'm confident we would win any conventional war against China in any theater. Our military is still far more advanced and we have a significantly stronger military tradition that counts for a lot.


in that economist article i linked it mentions

    Damage, not defeat
    The concern for America’s allies in the region is that, as China’s military clout grows, the risks entailed in defending them from bullying or a sudden aggressive act—a grab of disputed islands to claim mineral rights, say, or a threat to Taiwan’s sovereignty—will become greater than an American president could bear. Some countries might then decide to throw in their lot with the regional hegemon.

yeah, we could beat china. i'm not saying we can't, but it's about getting a bloody nose, and the resolve of the american people to continue. if the stakes are "filipino sovereignty over some stupid island" are we really prepared to stand up to china? or just let them claim the entire south china sea (which they have no business claiming btw, some chinese guy drew a line on a map like 50 years ago and that's the basis of their claim to all the water between them and the next island nation)
Image
User avatar
John Galt
Technical Admin
 
Posts: 11343
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2012 3:22 pm
Location: Bowling Green Massacre Survivor
Gender: None specified
Has thanked: 530 times
Been thanked: 1167 times
Political Leaning: Classic Liberal

Re: ISIS ‘dirty bomb’ claims

Postby Dylan » Tue Jun 30, 2015 1:05 pm

I mean, that's what I would do TBH.
Image
User avatar
Dylan
Vice President
 
Posts: 10741
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2012 1:34 pm
Gender: None specified
Has thanked: 1038 times
Been thanked: 916 times
Political Leaning: Middle of the Road

Re: ISIS ‘dirty bomb’ claims

Postby spacemonkey » Fri Jul 03, 2015 10:55 am

They need a bomb that only kills someone for 24 hours. After that, they come back to life.
The hardest part of doing nothing is knowing when your done.
spacemonkey
Governor
 
Posts: 4405
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2012 10:54 am
Location: cyberspace
Gender: None specified
Has thanked: 62 times
Been thanked: 261 times

Re: ISIS ‘dirty bomb’ claims

Postby Kane » Mon Jul 06, 2015 12:45 pm

A dirty bomb (radiological dispersal device) is incredibly easy to make...

Take some conventional explosives - wrap it in cesium 137.

Dirty bomb.

ISIS could figure this out.

http://www.epa.gov/superfund/health/con ... cesium.pdf
Stephen Jay Gould wrote:When people learn no tools of judgment and merely follow their hopes, the seeds of political manipulation are sown.
User avatar
Kane
Governor
 
Posts: 6214
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2012 1:09 pm
Location: The Yay
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 226 times
Been thanked: 446 times
Political Leaning: Rockefeller Republican

Re: ISIS ‘dirty bomb’ claims

Postby spacemonkey » Tue Jul 07, 2015 12:24 pm

Neanderthals don't need toys like that.
The hardest part of doing nothing is knowing when your done.
spacemonkey
Governor
 
Posts: 4405
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2012 10:54 am
Location: cyberspace
Gender: None specified
Has thanked: 62 times
Been thanked: 261 times

Re: ISIS ‘dirty bomb’ claims

Postby Davethulhu » Mon Jul 27, 2015 5:04 pm

ISIS will never use a dirty bomb.

1. Their primary motivation is taking and holding territory. They're not going to poison area that they want to own.
2. They are not planning or training or hoping to use a dirty bomb on American soil. Bin Laden was a fluke, a 1 in a million exception. All these guys care about is fighting their nearby enemies. They don't have the inclination or capabilities to fight outside their local area.

These users thanked the author Davethulhu for the post:
eynon81
User avatar
Davethulhu
Congressman
 
Posts: 977
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2012 8:45 pm
Gender: None specified
Has thanked: 9 times
Been thanked: 145 times
Political Leaning: Liberal

Re: ISIS ‘dirty bomb’ claims

Postby spacemonkey » Tue Jul 28, 2015 11:30 am

Davethulhu wrote:ISIS will never use a dirty bomb.

1. Their primary motivation is taking and holding territory. They're not going to poison area that they want to own.
2. They are not planning or training or hoping to use a dirty bomb on American soil. Bin Laden was a fluke, a 1 in a million exception. All these guys care about is fighting their nearby enemies. They don't have the inclination or capabilities to fight outside their local area.

I think isis is so stupid and backward, they probably piss in their own drinking cups. Killing Bin Laden had no bearing on anything. Well, except ending the most expensive manhunt in history. But on terrorism itself, nothing.
The hardest part of doing nothing is knowing when your done.
spacemonkey
Governor
 
Posts: 4405
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2012 10:54 am
Location: cyberspace
Gender: None specified
Has thanked: 62 times
Been thanked: 261 times

Previous

Post a reply

Quote Selected
 

Return to Front Page News

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest