Topic Actions

Topic Search

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests

US Nuclear Weapons out of Turkey?

The Management is not responsible for the contents of this forum. Enter at your own risk.
Re: US Nuclear Weapons out of Turkey?
Post by n7axw   » Tue Mar 03, 2020 10:04 am

n7axw
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 5510
Joined: Wed Jan 22, 2014 7:54 pm
Location: Viborg, SD

TFLYTSNBN wrote:
n7axw wrote:As for your evaluation of the Clintons, I'm not going there even though I disagree.

I 'm aware that I'm a bit too close to comfort to pc on this one and I don't like pc. But I'm going to say it anyway. Public comment on women's bodies is disrespectful. They come in all shapes and sizes and as the bearers of life deserve respect. I personally judge men by how they treat the women around them.

Don

-



I will get PC myself. A lot of women are unfairly presumed to be stupid just because they conform to the prevailing standards of attractiveness. Hence my reference to the often presumed, inverse correlation between breast size and intellect.

The PC issue set aside, the characteristics that most men find attractive generally correllate to fertility. The preference for a 2/3s waste to hip ration is essentially universal. Healthy skin and hair are also favored. There is more variance in preferences for other attributes. However; intelligence and professional success arev

Women judge men just as much as men judge women, but the criteria are different. Women place more emphasis on intelligence and financial success.

All of the alleged sexism aside, most wealthy countries have assertive mating where high earners marry each other. There are exceptions. I do know a successful attorney who is married to a mail carrier. This accounts for much of the economic disparity that liberals complain about.


The problem isn't so much economic disparity as the reality that upward mobility has been disappearing. Our forebearers left the old world looking for a fresh start and to get away from the class structure. It's taken only about 200+ years to recreate what we fled. Just as well start naming our oligarchs dukes, earls and barons.

Don

-
When any group seeks political power in God's name, both religion and politics are instantly corrupted.
Top
Re: US Nuclear Weapons out of Turkey?
Post by TFLYTSNBN   » Thu Mar 05, 2020 10:02 am

TFLYTSNBN
Admiral

Posts: 2232
Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2018 8:58 am

NATO is fracturing.

https://news.trust.org/item/20200305095415-o5dbs

Bring our nukes home!
Top
Re: US Nuclear Weapons out of Turkey?
Post by n7axw   » Thu Mar 05, 2020 6:05 pm

n7axw
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 5510
Joined: Wed Jan 22, 2014 7:54 pm
Location: Viborg, SD

TFLYTSNBN wrote:NATO is fracturing.

https://news.trust.org/item/20200305095415-o5dbs

Bring our nukes home!


Turkey has been on the fringe of NATO for a long time. I agree. Get the nukes out of Turkey, at least. As for the squabbling with Greece, that has been going on for a long time too.

Don

-
When any group seeks political power in God's name, both religion and politics are instantly corrupted.
Top
Re: US Nuclear Weapons out of Turkey?
Post by TFLYTSNBN   » Thu Mar 05, 2020 7:17 pm

TFLYTSNBN
Admiral

Posts: 2232
Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2018 8:58 am

n7axw wrote:
TFLYTSNBN wrote:NATO is fracturing.

https://news.trust.org/item/20200305095415-o5dbs

Bring our nukes home!


Turkey has been on the fringe of NATO for a long time. I agree. Get the nukes out of Turkey, at least. As for the squabbling with Greece, that has been going on for a long time too.

Don

-


Squabbling between alleged allies is one thing, armed conflict is another. In addition to the refugee issue, Turkey is facing off against Greece (and non-NATO Israel) over gas and oil drilling in the Mediterranean. There is also the problem of Turkey supporting the opposite side supported by other NATO members in Lybia.

I know about the PAL, Permissive Access Locks, that can prevent Turkey from detonating the nukes. However; these locks would not prevent Turkey from dismantling the nukes to remove all of the electronics that are disabled, then reassembling the "pits" (fissile cores) and thermonuclear assemblies along with any fissionable cladding, with their own electronics, detonators and chemical explosives. While it is possible to set the locks to destroy the weapons by detonating the chemical explosives out of synchronization to shatter and scatter the fissile cores, this would have political complications. The B-61 utilizes Plutonium rather than Uranium. While Pu-239 has a half-life of 24,000 years which makes it mildly radioactive, even the highest grade Plutonium has traces of Pu-238 which has a half-life of 87 years. Pu-238 isn't highly radioactive, it is intermediate radioactive. If such self destruct we're to be activated while the weapons are in their vaults, the fissile material would be confined to a small area which would enable Turkey to recover and reuse it.

The days of fighter-attack aircraft being tasked to deliverer nukes are almost over. The B-2 is a far more survivable platform. Better to bring all US nukes home and deploy them only if use becomes eminent.
Top
Re: US Nuclear Weapons out of Turkey?
Post by Dilandu   » Fri Mar 06, 2020 3:40 pm

Dilandu
Admiral

Posts: 2365
Joined: Sat May 07, 2011 12:44 pm
Location: Russia

TFLYTSNBN wrote: While it is possible to set the locks to destroy the weapons by detonating the chemical explosives out of synchronization to shatter and scatter the fissile cores, this would have political complications.


Just took out the neutron initiators, and bombs are essentially rendered inert. Those aren't exactly easy to replace.

TFLYTSNBN wrote:The days of fighter-attack aircraft being tasked to deliverer nukes are almost over. The B-2 is a far more survivable platform. Better to bring all US nukes home and deploy them only if use becomes eminent.


Actually no. The F-35 and JDAM-type glide/guidance kits represent a new and quite efficient concept of nuclear weapon delivery. F-35 could be used for low altitude penetration of air defenses, and delivering bomb by toss-bombing method; which, in case of JDAM-type bomb being used, could allow bomb to be tossed from standoff distance and with absolute precision.

The B-2 maybe more survivable platform, but it is a subsonic strategic bomber. It is NOT suitable for tactical nuclear strikes. It would simply took far too long for B-2 to take off from rearward airfield, reach the combat theater and drop the nuke.
------------------------------

Oh well, if shortening the front is what the Germans crave,
Let's shorten it to very end - the length of Fuhrer's grave.

(Red Army lyrics from 1945)
Top
Re: US Nuclear Weapons out of Turkey?
Post by n7axw   » Fri Mar 06, 2020 5:48 pm

n7axw
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 5510
Joined: Wed Jan 22, 2014 7:54 pm
Location: Viborg, SD

The point is that Greece and Turkey have been at it a long time, including at least one incident of outright war.

Don

-
When any group seeks political power in God's name, both religion and politics are instantly corrupted.
Top
Re: US Nuclear Weapons out of Turkey?
Post by TFLYTSNBN   » Fri Mar 06, 2020 6:16 pm

TFLYTSNBN
Admiral

Posts: 2232
Joined: Tue Aug 07, 2018 8:58 am

Dilandu wrote:
TFLYTSNBN wrote: While it is possible to set the locks to destroy the weapons by detonating the chemical explosives out of synchronization to shatter and scatter the fissile cores, this would have political complications.


Just took out the neutron initiators, and bombs are essentially rendered inert. Those aren't exactly easy to replace.

TFLYTSNBN wrote:The days of fighter-attack aircraft being tasked to deliverer nukes are almost over. The B-2 is a far more survivable platform. Better to bring all US nukes home and deploy them only if use becomes eminent.


Actually no. The F-35 and JDAM-type glide/guidance kits represent a new and quite efficient concept of nuclear weapon delivery. F-35 could be used for low altitude penetration of air defenses, and delivering bomb by toss-bombing method; which, in case of JDAM-type bomb being used, could allow bomb to be tossed from standoff distance and with absolute precision.

The B-2 maybe more survivable platform, but it is a subsonic strategic bomber. It is NOT suitable for tactical nuclear strikes. It would simply took far too long for B-2 to take off from rearward airfield, reach the combat theater and drop the nuke.


The physics package of the B-61 employs "super grade" Plutonium. Although it has a higher purity of Pu-239, it still has a high enough concentration of Pu-240 which undergoes spontaneous fission to initiate the chain reaction. No initiators needed.
Top

Return to Politics