5 ms·

Those bases weren't hidden enough ... it's my understanding that we have the same capability today but with "mobile missles", the enemy can't easily defeat a co

by smoyer 10y ago

Those bases weren't hidden enough ... it's my understanding that we have the same capability today but with "mobile missles", the enemy can't easily defeat a counter-strike.

ethbro 10y ago
The US nuclear detergent still includes land based missiles as one of its components. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGM-30_Minuteman#Minuteman-III_.28LGM-30G.29 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGM-30_Minuteman#Minuteman-I...
- chrisseaton 10y ago
  > The US nuclear detergent
  - ethbro 10y ago
    "We clean international geopolitics so you don't have to!" /joking That's what pre-coffee cell typing with a glitchy digitizer gets me, I guess. Leaving unedited to stand by my words (and shame).
    - mikeash 10y ago
      Thank you for leaving it unedited, that was a good laugh.
chiph 10y ago
The BGM-109G "Gryphon" ground-launched cruise missiles were all destroyed (except a few for museums) as part of the INF treaty. The warheads were put into storage. https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1990/04/12/cruise-missile-drawdown-begins-at-us-air-base-in-west-germany/2ec6db6a-a062-4f91-bf1b-b8d63c667ce1/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1990/04/12/c... The system used large off-road capable trucks and would drive to one of several pre-surveyed locations in preparation for launch. Source: The 38th Tactical Missile Wing was at Wueschheim Air Station, just down the road from where I was stationed at Hahn. Also, a friend was a surveyor for the Army, who scouted locations for the Pershing II IRBM in the pre-GPS world.
chakalakasp 10y ago
If by "we" you mean Russia, then yes, you have mobile missiles. America's mobile missiles glide quietly under the ocean in Trident nuclear submarines. All of America's land based launch capabilities are in fixed nuclear silos. They are not and have never been hidden; Russia even gets to come inspect them from time to time (and visa versa) as part of the treaties both nations have signed. Both nations maintain enough weaponry to launch a massive retaliatory strike even if hit with a first strike, it's part of what makes both nations feel secure that neither would be dumb enough to try a sneak attack. For America, some of the silos are placed far north in Montana to make an offensive first strike more effective, some of them are placed further south (Wyoming, Colorado, Nebraska) to give a few more minutes to get missiles off during a surprise attack. The silos are spaced out enough that each would require a ground burst to destroy them, but close enough so that the nuclear debris cloud (mushroom cloud) would potentially damage or destroy incoming warheads (coming in at ludicrous speed) before they made it to the ground. The radioactive cloud that would be farted into the upper atmosphere by the debris clouds from the attacks on these missile fields would probably be responsible for well over half the national fatalities in a counterforce nuclear attack. We're talking hundreds of near-megaton ground bursts.
- mikeash 10y ago
  All of those ground bursts are conveniently located upwind from where most of our food comes from, too.
  - effie 10y ago
    How do you mean, conveniently? That the explosions near the silos will spoil the sources of the food? Sorry I have to ask, I'm not a native English speaker.
    - mikeash 10y ago
      Yes, fallout would be blown downwind and contaminate large areas of agricultural land. "Conveniently" is being used sarcastically here, since that is of course very much not convenient.

by smoyer 10y ago

Those bases weren't hidden enough ... it's my understanding that we have the same capability today but with "mobile missles", the enemy can't easily defeat a counter-strike.

ethbro 10y ago

The US nuclear detergent still includes land based missiles as one of its components. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGM-30_Minuteman#Minuteman-III_.28LGM-30G.29 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGM-30_Minuteman#Minuteman-I...

chrisseaton 10y ago
> The US nuclear detergent
- ethbro 10y ago
  "We clean international geopolitics so you don't have to!" /joking That's what pre-coffee cell typing with a glitchy digitizer gets me, I guess. Leaving unedited to stand by my words (and shame).
  - mikeash 10y ago
    Thank you for leaving it unedited, that was a good laugh.

chiph 10y ago

The BGM-109G "Gryphon" ground-launched cruise missiles were all destroyed (except a few for museums) as part of the INF treaty. The warheads were put into storage. https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1990/04/12/cruise-missile-drawdown-begins-at-us-air-base-in-west-germany/2ec6db6a-a062-4f91-bf1b-b8d63c667ce1/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1990/04/12/c... The system used large off-road capable trucks and would drive to one of several pre-surveyed locations in preparation for launch. Source: The 38th Tactical Missile Wing was at Wueschheim Air Station, just down the road from where I was stationed at Hahn. Also, a friend was a surveyor for the Army, who scouted locations for the Pershing II IRBM in the pre-GPS world.

chakalakasp 10y ago

If by "we" you mean Russia, then yes, you have mobile missiles. America's mobile missiles glide quietly under the ocean in Trident nuclear submarines. All of America's land based launch capabilities are in fixed nuclear silos. They are not and have never been hidden; Russia even gets to come inspect them from time to time (and visa versa) as part of the treaties both nations have signed. Both nations maintain enough weaponry to launch a massive retaliatory strike even if hit with a first strike, it's part of what makes both nations feel secure that neither would be dumb enough to try a sneak attack. For America, some of the silos are placed far north in Montana to make an offensive first strike more effective, some of them are placed further south (Wyoming, Colorado, Nebraska) to give a few more minutes to get missiles off during a surprise attack. The silos are spaced out enough that each would require a ground burst to destroy them, but close enough so that the nuclear debris cloud (mushroom cloud) would potentially damage or destroy incoming warheads (coming in at ludicrous speed) before they made it to the ground. The radioactive cloud that would be farted into the upper atmosphere by the debris clouds from the attacks on these missile fields would probably be responsible for well over half the national fatalities in a counterforce nuclear attack. We're talking hundreds of near-megaton ground bursts.

mikeash 10y ago
All of those ground bursts are conveniently located upwind from where most of our food comes from, too.
- effie 10y ago
  How do you mean, conveniently? That the explosions near the silos will spoil the sources of the food? Sorry I have to ask, I'm not a native English speaker.
  - mikeash 10y ago
    Yes, fallout would be blown downwind and contaminate large areas of agricultural land. "Conveniently" is being used sarcastically here, since that is of course very much not convenient.