(08-05-2025 12:55 PM)Attackcoog Wrote: Our stuff is better no doubt---so is our kill chain---but quantity matters. The Sherman wasnt as good as the Tiger tank. Not a single fighter in the Allied inventory could match a Me-262 jet fighter---but none of that mattered because there were roughly 36 Shermans for every 1 Tiger and 10 Mustangs and 10 Thunderbolts for every one Me-262. Look at Ukraine---you cant win a war using a 4 million dollar Patriot or even a 1 million dollar AIM-120 to kill a $40K Shaheed drone that can be cheaply produced by the thousands each month. Its not just stockpile capacity---there is also a need to spend smarter. We need cheaper mass produced solutions to address low tech weaponry like FPV-drones and Shaheds---that soon will be improved and enhanced with increasing levels of onboard AI. Interesting, a solution I mentioned months ago is being tested in the field in Ukraine. It is a reusable AI enhanced "fighter" drone that uses a mounted shot gun to hunt and shoot down enemy drones.
This pisses me off when it comes to our defense department...or maybe equally how our commanders are spoiled by American Excess. WTF are Patriots used on drones??? Maybe I'm just ignorant in military matters but haven't we had an effective solution to this decades ago? Don't our ships have the Phalanx system for attacks like these??? Isn't the tech capable of being applied on land???
To be fair,. at this point, the Ukrainians are using the Patriots as a last line of defense---largely using those for defense against ballistic missiles. They have developed a quite sophisticated layered defense (even using phone apps so civilian spotters can help locate threats and report their path) to take down Shahed drones more economically using everything from mobile MANPAD or anti-aircraft gun teams to chasing them down with the side door gunner of a chopper. That said, the US was using expensive Evolved Sea Sparrow missiles and sidewinders to shoot down crappy Shahed type drones in the Red Sea (far too costly a solution). They were using the 5 inch gun later to down them----which is much cheaper---but its hard to blame the captains for not wanting to let these drones get close enough to be engaged by the SeaWiz. If something goes wrong at that range---and the ship takes damages and casualties---the question will be ""why didnt you take this out when it was farther out?". Economics wont be a good answer at that point with lives lost and 100 million in damage to a billion dollar ship.
We need cheap containerized drone interceptors that can be launched and take these drones out at an acceptably safe range. Lasers and smart shells (assuming the cost is right) are also potential options for economically dealing with this kind of future swarming drone threat.
There is a neat system called Leonidas that is being rush develpoed in the US that uses directed microwaves and tracking system to specifically counter drones.
And the Germans are having the Ukrainians use their Gepard SPAAG in the effort. And the results of the Gepard are pretty good. Its simply getting them in areas in enough density to hit swarms. With foursey fivesys -- they are very effective.
Exactly. Its nothing but more of the same Putin blah blah blah until the shooting actually stops.....and absolutely nothing indicates the shooting is anywhere near stopping. If Putin wanted to stop the war it would end virtually instantly. The fact its still going on is the only proof needed to indicate Putin doesnt really want peace. When Putin truly understands he can NOT get EVERYTHING he wants on the battlefield is the moment a sustainable reasonable compromise peace will be actually become possible (and not a moment before). Its not complicated. Never has been. At least Trump has begun to use the "stick" rather than just the carrot.
(This post was last modified: 08-06-2025 01:39 PM by Attackcoog.)
Our subs are always strategically placed to react in the event of a Russian first strike but we typically don’t advertise their location.
Advertise location? All Trump said was he moved TWO subs into position. That can be hundreds of miles in almost any direction, lol. And extremely far apart from each other.
(08-06-2025 01:45 PM)olliebaba Wrote: Why do they tell us how they work? Wouldn't it be better to keep everything secret? And how long before the Chinese steal the work?
You know they DO keep it all secret right? Mensa is just believing all the crap they put out on the MSM.
(This post was last modified: 08-06-2025 01:51 PM by BartlettTigerFan.)
(08-06-2025 01:40 PM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote: So now you're an expert on our strategically placed subs? Hot damn I'm impressed all to hell. Tell us more. This is better than Tom stories.
(08-06-2025 01:40 PM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote: So now you're an expert on our strategically placed subs? Hot damn I'm impressed all to hell. Tell us more. This is better than Tom stories.
So you think that our subs are never strategically placed? Hot damn Im impressed. Tell us more.
(08-06-2025 01:40 PM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote: So now you're an expert on our strategically placed subs? Hot damn I'm impressed all to hell. Tell us more. This is better than Tom stories.
So you think that our subs are never strategically placed? Hot damn Im impressed. Tell us more.
Yep, they’re just sitting at port waiting for Donald Trump to deploy them…
What an f’n joke
(This post was last modified: 08-06-2025 02:21 PM by Marc Mensa.)
(08-06-2025 01:40 PM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote: So now you're an expert on our strategically placed subs? Hot damn I'm impressed all to hell. Tell us more. This is better than Tom stories.
Oh, I’m not, but John Bolton is…
Do you realize the fatal flaw your side committed? You made it extremely hard for the corporate media to deliver any credible critique of DJT. Even if it's 100% valid and CNN or the like put real resources into their story, triple checked sources and verified EVERYTHING...the majority of people will either 1) assume it's a political smear piece or 2) not bother to watch because the media doesn't report news anymore (they try to control the news).
The traditional media has a credibility problem. Just like John Stewart in the early 2000s was a primary source of news for many - the rot in corporate media has been there for awhile - people don't trust traditional, legacy, corporate media. They'd rather read stories from social media or consume it from non-traditional news sources.
Didn't watch the CNN video, but let's say John Bolton is 100% dead on correct on his take down of Trump (assume that's what he did). Few will take it seriously - most won't. Because you just can't trust what comes from CNN anymore. Not after the Russia collusion garbage, the Hillary Clinton bungling of top secret materials that were hidden, the strong stance on Hunter Biden's laptop that was false, the coverup of Biden's cognitive decline happened...all of this and more...dropped the media's credibility into the toilet.
Quote:Americans continue to register record-low trust in the mass media, with 31% expressing a “great deal” or “fair amount” of confidence in the media to report the news “fully, accurately and fairly,” similar to last year’s 32%. Americans’ trust in the media -- such as newspapers, television and radio -- first fell to 32% in 2016 and did so again last year.
For the third consecutive year, more U.S. adults have no trust at all in the media (36%) than trust it a great deal or fair amount. Another 33% of Americans express “not very much” confidence.
Our subs are always strategically placed to react in the event of a Russian first strike but we typically don’t advertise their location.
Advertise location? All Trump said was he moved TWO subs into position. That can be hundreds of miles in almost any direction, lol. And extremely far apart from each other.
Trump advertised he moved 2 subs into position.
Only two possibilities beforehand --
a) he didnt have subs already in place, which would be an asinine posture, and announcing it to the world has an effect;
b) he had subs in place, and advertised to the world two more. In effect kind of a no change. But somehow in Trump land that might have an effect when he announces it not to Russia, but to the world. That is, looks like simple political self-aggrandizement. Political theater.
(08-06-2025 01:40 PM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote: So now you're an expert on our strategically placed subs? Hot damn I'm impressed all to hell. Tell us more. This is better than Tom stories.
So you think that our subs are never strategically placed? Hot damn Im impressed. Tell us more.
Yep, they’re just sitting at port waiting for Donald Trump to deploy them…
What an f’n joke
Waiting for that announcement to the world, mind you.
(08-06-2025 01:40 PM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote: So now you're an expert on our strategically placed subs? Hot damn I'm impressed all to hell. Tell us more. This is better than Tom stories.
So you think that our subs are never strategically placed? Hot damn Im impressed. Tell us more.
Yep, they’re just sitting at port waiting for Donald Trump to deploy them…
What an f’n joke
Waiting for that announcement to the world, mind you.
Oh look...Mensa and the patent attroney stroking each others TDS.
(08-06-2025 01:40 PM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote: So now you're an expert on our strategically placed subs? Hot damn I'm impressed all to hell. Tell us more. This is better than Tom stories.
Oh, I’m not, but John Bolton is…
And nowhere in this interview does John Bolton say that Trump advertised their position. And yes, he is correct that the nuclear subs can hit Russia from anywhere anytime. What he doesnt say is the nukes can arrive faster depending on where the sub is located.
Our subs are always strategically placed to react in the event of a Russian first strike but we typically don’t advertise their location.
Advertise location? All Trump said was he moved TWO subs into position. That can be hundreds of miles in almost any direction, lol. And extremely far apart from each other.
Trump advertised he moved 2 subs into position.
Only two possibilities beforehand --
a) he didnt have subs already in place, which would be an asinine posture, and announcing it to the world has an effect;
b) he had subs in place, and advertised to the world two more. In effect kind of a no change. But somehow in Trump land that might have an effect when he announces it not to Russia, but to the world. That is, looks like simple political self-aggrandizement. Political theater.
Or "C" ---Trump is letting Putin and the Russian public know the US has the ability to glass the entirety of Russia---for which they have no defense---something the Russian people are NEVER told when the talking heads and leadership constantly discusses the need to nuke NATO nations or the US as casually as aa American afternoon newscast discusses the weather.
Think about that. When was the last time you saw an American national TV newscaster casually explaining how we needed to go ahead and destroy Russia with nuclear weapons (while never mentioning the return strike would glass everything of value in the entirety of America)? The Russian people hear that kind of talk of nuking America (or England, or France, or NATO, etc) every day with no mention of what the return strike would do to Russia. The Russian people need to be reminded every so often that the West has nukes too and the Russian people have no defense what so ever against those weapons. Putin as well needs to be rebuked publicly and this was the perfect way to call out the folly the Putin government constant nuclear saber ratting in a way the Russian people can understand---but without directly attacking Putin himself. It was actually pretty clever.
(This post was last modified: 08-06-2025 03:16 PM by Attackcoog.)
Sort of OT and I guess a chance to enlighten a young ‘un: Was there this sort of divisiveness with assisting the Afghans in the 80s when Russia invaded? That was before my time, so I legitimately don’t know. Conservatives hold Reagan in such high regard, I was curious if there was unity within the Republican Party then to assist Afghanistan, or if there was a faction that was against it. Or if Russia was perceived more as a threat then compared to now (I know that was during one of the more tense times of the Cold War).
Our subs are always strategically placed to react in the event of a Russian first strike but we typically don’t advertise their location.
Advertise location? All Trump said was he moved TWO subs into position. That can be hundreds of miles in almost any direction, lol. And extremely far apart from each other.
Trump advertised he moved 2 subs into position.
Only two possibilities beforehand --
a) he didnt have subs already in place, which would be an asinine posture, and announcing it to the world has an effect;
b) he had subs in place, and advertised to the world two more. In effect kind of a no change. But somehow in Trump land that might have an effect when he announces it not to Russia, but to the world. That is, looks like simple political self-aggrandizement. Political theater.
Which has zero effect on anything except the psyche of TDS-inflicted people.
