I don't know what stations you're going into or what line you're riding, but in the past year out of all my regular trips on all lines and even the commuter rail I haven't seen or heard any of that shit.
The only thing I hear in a train besides the next stop is the operator nagging for 30 seconds at every station "please move to the center of the train" and "please move away from the doors".
Boomers don't launch cruise missiles. They carry their own submarine launched ballistic missiles, SLBM's.
Cruise missiles currently have too short a range to fill much of a strategic role.
Taking out downtown Manhattan would not have taken 8-12 missiles. That's what MIRV is for. The delivery of multiple warheads on one missile. Spread several small warheads in overlapping patterns and you do more damage than one very large warhead right in the center. This is the reason why we (USA) tend to use 150-350kt range warheads nowadays.
It's unlikely that cruise missiles would be used to target enemy missile installations. A nuclear war would be very sudden, and naval forces might not have time to be in place. Cruise missiles fill more of a tactical role than a strategic one.
There are many different types of attacks you can launch with nuclear weapons such as counter-industry, counter-population, counter-strategic, counter-energy, etc... The meanings are pretty self explainatory.
A full on counter-strategic attack (one that's meant to take out ICBM silos, SSBN bases, bomber bases, etc..) would in the long run kill more people in the USA than a full on counter-population strike. Why is that? Think method of detonation, and resulting fallout.
When you want to take out a city you're generally going to use several smaller warheads in a pattern airbursted around the target. The fireball touches very little, and therefore very little (comparatively) fallout is created. OTOH, when you go to take out a strategic site, which is hardened you need a rather large groundburst to literally scour it out of the ground. Result is that much debris is sucked into the fireball and irradiated, and then spread downwind.
Where are the bulk of US missile bases? Which direction does the wind blow?
It is definitely feasable. In fact, I've begun work to startup a company solely for surveying and mining other planetary bodies. I'm thinking of naming the company Weyland Yutani and so far my engineers have put together a preliminary ship design we call 'Nostromo'
Yeah you're absolutely correct. I can remember in my town we burn out this family of arabs about two years ago that live up the street from me. Then we when to the Afghani family's house that's a block away from mine.
In truth if I remember correctly one of my neighbors was arrested shortly after the attacks for beating the shit out of someone that was harrassing the arab family. Yeah, we've got a close 'hood.
When the end comes I'm going to be on a trimiran with Kevin Costner laughing my ass off at all you people who sat here bitching at each other instead of preparing for the future calamity that will befall us very soon.
BTW... I'd put my money on a potential cause being the big burning ball that's 1AU away from us, but hey that's just me.
Hey you never know, maybe some day we'll live in the world of happy happy where everybody gets along and watches Laverne & Shirley reruns, and militaries are no longer required.
Of course in this world of 'reality' I doubt that will ever happen.
Actually the USA only supplied Stinger MANPADS to Afghani Mujahideen to fight the Soviets. Stingers have never been used against any US forces, and in addition to that the Mujahideen later became for the most part, the Northern Alliance. The Taliban came largely from Pakistan.
There is a USS Jimmy Carter. It's a modified Seawolf-class submarine, which are in fact the most badass submarines in the world right now. Eight forward torpedo tubes with automated magazine loaders, plus she's the quietest and among the fastest boat in the fleet. Too bad only three of them were made though.... and I'm kinda wondering how Jimmy got one named after him. Guess it's cause he skippered a sub while he was USN.
ICBM's are to be eternally associated with nuclear weapons and as such there is no way to determine whether a launched ICBM contains conventional or nuclear payload. If a missile were launched then people in jumpiness may be forced to launch an overwhelming counterattack.
ICBM's will never, ever be used to carry conventional weapons.
"p.s. The CIA helped the Iraqis gas the Kurds. Not to mention the U.S. sold them the helicopters. See this report by a professor at Cornell, if your memory of history is a bit foggy."
Pretty interesting considering that the incident in question, the bombing of the Kurdish village of Halabja in 1988 wasn't even commited by helicopters but by fighter-bombers.... MiG-26's if I recall correctly. Maybe the CIA lit up the town with laser designators though.
Some of this is a bit fuzzy as I haven't ready much on it recently, but China's longest reaching ICBM is the Dong Feng-5 (CSS-4) which is typically outfitted with a single 5Mt warhead and has a range of 13,000km. Estimates are that China currently has 20 of these ready to fly. With their range I can remember reading that they cannot yet hit targets in the eastern CONUS, however would be able to hit our bases in Japan, Hawaii, as well as anywhere on the west coast.
As far as SLBM's we have one (possibly two) Xia class: SSBN (type 092, 8,000 tons), armed with 12 JL-1 (CSS-N-3) SLBMs (range 1,700km with a single 1.25MT nuclear warhead). A major update of the class started in 1995 to fit the new JL-2 SLBM system, with the upgrade expected to be completed in 1998. The JL-2 (CSS-NX-4) SLBMs is reported to carry 3 or 4 MIRV (90kT each) or a single 250kt warhead with a range of 8,000km. As to wether the upgrade took place or not remains uncertain. There is also uncertainty regarding the second hull which is believed lost in an accident in 1985.
Hope this clears up some info on China's nuclear capability for people.
Purchasing the right part WILL get you a massive overclock though. The prime example is the Athlon XP 2100+ Thoroughbred B part. This CPU is actually running at 1730Mhz, however many overclockers are getting these CPU's up to 2500Mhz on stock air-cooling and 100% stable. It's unknown why these particular parts are doing such a high overclock, but anyway you slice it a 44% overclock is pretty significant.
Also, my own CPU which runs at 1830Mhz and overclocks to 2200Mhz is still getting a 20% overclock.
The thing with overclocking usually isn't to get the newest, and fastest CPU and then overclock the hell of it. It's to get something in the midrange and then overclock.
For instance, when the Barton core was first released you didn't see curious overclockers buying 3000+ parts to overclock, no they (myself included) purchased the 2500+ part at a savings of roughly $400.
I can overclock my 2500+ up to what SiSoft Sandra says is 3200+ performance specs with very little noise a-la my watercooling system. I needed a watercooler anyway due to the high temperatures in the summer in my room, and guess what? It's completely stable.
People won't buy the 3200+ CPU's en mass to overclock them, but they will buy the boards updated to run the 400Mhz bus so that they can overclock their old 266 and 333Mhz bus CPU's in a more stable environment.
While you might be able to operate technology while inebriated, come to Boston and stand on Boylston street for a good show. Belligerance and idiocy rolled into one convenient package, and there's no way in hell half those people could operate anything.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't know what stations you're going into or what line you're riding, but in the past year out of all my regular trips on all lines and even the commuter rail I haven't seen or heard any of that shit. The only thing I hear in a train besides the next stop is the operator nagging for 30 seconds at every station "please move to the center of the train" and "please move away from the doors".
Maybe THAT is where Atlantis is!
Boomers don't launch cruise missiles. They carry their own submarine launched ballistic missiles, SLBM's. Cruise missiles currently have too short a range to fill much of a strategic role.
How many nuclear warheads did cruise missiles carry in the Gulf War? Also, how many ICBM silos were destroyed by these cruise missiles?
Taking out downtown Manhattan would not have taken 8-12 missiles. That's what MIRV is for. The delivery of multiple warheads on one missile. Spread several small warheads in overlapping patterns and you do more damage than one very large warhead right in the center. This is the reason why we (USA) tend to use 150-350kt range warheads nowadays.
It's unlikely that cruise missiles would be used to target enemy missile installations. A nuclear war would be very sudden, and naval forces might not have time to be in place. Cruise missiles fill more of a tactical role than a strategic one.
There are many different types of attacks you can launch with nuclear weapons such as counter-industry, counter-population, counter-strategic, counter-energy, etc... The meanings are pretty self explainatory.
A full on counter-strategic attack (one that's meant to take out ICBM silos, SSBN bases, bomber bases, etc..) would in the long run kill more people in the USA than a full on counter-population strike. Why is that? Think method of detonation, and resulting fallout.
When you want to take out a city you're generally going to use several smaller warheads in a pattern airbursted around the target. The fireball touches very little, and therefore very little (comparatively) fallout is created. OTOH, when you go to take out a strategic site, which is hardened you need a rather large groundburst to literally scour it out of the ground. Result is that much debris is sucked into the fireball and irradiated, and then spread downwind.
Where are the bulk of US missile bases? Which direction does the wind blow?
What's Marz? Is that a new planet?
It is definitely feasable. In fact, I've begun work to startup a company solely for surveying and mining other planetary bodies. I'm thinking of naming the company Weyland Yutani and so far my engineers have put together a preliminary ship design we call 'Nostromo'
Already referred to by many as a 'self-propelled funeral fire'.
Yeah you're absolutely correct. I can remember in my town we burn out this family of arabs about two years ago that live up the street from me. Then we when to the Afghani family's house that's a block away from mine.
In truth if I remember correctly one of my neighbors was arrested shortly after the attacks for beating the shit out of someone that was harrassing the arab family. Yeah, we've got a close 'hood.
When the end comes I'm going to be on a trimiran with Kevin Costner laughing my ass off at all you people who sat here bitching at each other instead of preparing for the future calamity that will befall us very soon. BTW... I'd put my money on a potential cause being the big burning ball that's 1AU away from us, but hey that's just me.
I don't think it's looking to circle the globe, so much as head to the Arabian Peninsula and found Zero-One. Surely we are doomed.
Yeah I'm well aware who Nimrod was. I payed attention in History, and CCD. As I said in another post, it still does not sound right for a warship.
Hey you never know, maybe some day we'll live in the world of happy happy where everybody gets along and watches Laverne & Shirley reruns, and militaries are no longer required. Of course in this world of 'reality' I doubt that will ever happen.
It just doesn't sound right for a warship. I do however like the sound of Ark Royal.... that's got a sound of prestige and power to it.
Actually the USA only supplied Stinger MANPADS to Afghani Mujahideen to fight the Soviets. Stingers have never been used against any US forces, and in addition to that the Mujahideen later became for the most part, the Northern Alliance. The Taliban came largely from Pakistan.
How the fuck does something like this get labeled 'Insightful'?
There is a USS Jimmy Carter. It's a modified Seawolf-class submarine, which are in fact the most badass submarines in the world right now. Eight forward torpedo tubes with automated magazine loaders, plus she's the quietest and among the fastest boat in the fleet. Too bad only three of them were made though.... and I'm kinda wondering how Jimmy got one named after him. Guess it's cause he skippered a sub while he was USN.
I mean come on.... HMS Nimrod?
Finding gas giants, big deal. If they want to impress me they should try to find Chulak.
ICBM's are to be eternally associated with nuclear weapons and as such there is no way to determine whether a launched ICBM contains conventional or nuclear payload. If a missile were launched then people in jumpiness may be forced to launch an overwhelming counterattack. ICBM's will never, ever be used to carry conventional weapons.
"p.s. The CIA helped the Iraqis gas the Kurds. Not to mention the U.S. sold them the helicopters. See this report by a professor at Cornell, if your memory of history is a bit foggy."
Pretty interesting considering that the incident in question, the bombing of the Kurdish village of Halabja in 1988 wasn't even commited by helicopters but by fighter-bombers.... MiG-26's if I recall correctly. Maybe the CIA lit up the town with laser designators though.
Some of this is a bit fuzzy as I haven't ready much on it recently, but China's longest reaching ICBM is the Dong Feng-5 (CSS-4) which is typically outfitted with a single 5Mt warhead and has a range of 13,000km. Estimates are that China currently has 20 of these ready to fly. With their range I can remember reading that they cannot yet hit targets in the eastern CONUS, however would be able to hit our bases in Japan, Hawaii, as well as anywhere on the west coast. As far as SLBM's we have one (possibly two) Xia class: SSBN (type 092, 8,000 tons), armed with 12 JL-1 (CSS-N-3) SLBMs (range 1,700km with a single 1.25MT nuclear warhead). A major update of the class started in 1995 to fit the new JL-2 SLBM system, with the upgrade expected to be completed in 1998. The JL-2 (CSS-NX-4) SLBMs is reported to carry 3 or 4 MIRV (90kT each) or a single 250kt warhead with a range of 8,000km. As to wether the upgrade took place or not remains uncertain. There is also uncertainty regarding the second hull which is believed lost in an accident in 1985. Hope this clears up some info on China's nuclear capability for people.
Purchasing the right part WILL get you a massive overclock though. The prime example is the Athlon XP 2100+ Thoroughbred B part. This CPU is actually running at 1730Mhz, however many overclockers are getting these CPU's up to 2500Mhz on stock air-cooling and 100% stable. It's unknown why these particular parts are doing such a high overclock, but anyway you slice it a 44% overclock is pretty significant.
Also, my own CPU which runs at 1830Mhz and overclocks to 2200Mhz is still getting a 20% overclock.
The thing with overclocking usually isn't to get the newest, and fastest CPU and then overclock the hell of it. It's to get something in the midrange and then overclock. For instance, when the Barton core was first released you didn't see curious overclockers buying 3000+ parts to overclock, no they (myself included) purchased the 2500+ part at a savings of roughly $400. I can overclock my 2500+ up to what SiSoft Sandra says is 3200+ performance specs with very little noise a-la my watercooling system. I needed a watercooler anyway due to the high temperatures in the summer in my room, and guess what? It's completely stable. People won't buy the 3200+ CPU's en mass to overclock them, but they will buy the boards updated to run the 400Mhz bus so that they can overclock their old 266 and 333Mhz bus CPU's in a more stable environment.
While you might be able to operate technology while inebriated, come to Boston and stand on Boylston street for a good show. Belligerance and idiocy rolled into one convenient package, and there's no way in hell half those people could operate anything.