Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Former Military Chick
Of course we can step up if it becomes necessary. These stories about us not being able to effectively wage a 2 front war are nonsense.

We have a military unsurpassed in the history of the world. Forgetting our land and sea based assets for the moment, we have enough destructive firepower on the 20-24 nuke submarines to destroy any number of bad guys countries. Each sub carries 24 missiles and each missile carries 10 warheads. Do the math, 24 boats x 24 missiles per boat x 10 warheads per missile = 5760 nuke warheads, each with more destructive power then the bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Now keep in mind this is NOT including our Navy or land based assets.

This is the reason I personally believe no Nation will EVER attack us with nukes. If they do their destruction will be both swift and total.

Of course the nutbag ragheads are a different story but I believe if the terror supporting nations are put on notice that if we are nuked by one of the independent animal groups that They (M.E. nations) will be held responsible and will pay a terrible price. Of course we will have ample evidence on hand before we annihilate anyone, this also will not be a problem.

7 posted on 11/08/2007 3:00:47 PM PST by aroundabout
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: aroundabout
These stories about us not being able to effectively wage a 2 front war are nonsense.

I think the worry is that any war with Iran would end up with tens of thousands of Iranians pouring across the Afghanistan and Iraq borders, which would cause problems for us (the least of which, Iranian agents in Iraq have probably already been setting up to help them fight us). We've been killing and capturing Iranians in Iraq for several years, and it's a dirty little secret (not well kept) that they are Quuds and the like - the types of forces that would be prepping to assist Iranian troops crossing the borders into Iraq. Those people have a point - Iran of 2007 is not Iraq of 2003, and my view is that Iran has been building up a force specifically for Iraq, probably when we leave, but they would also be handy for Iran to use in Iraq if we attack.

I don't see us attacking though, because it would hand the 2008 elections over to the Democrats. Regardless of whether we should not, if the majority of Americans are against it, and we do it anyway, then the GOP is finished in politics for a few election cycles.
29 posted on 11/08/2007 4:59:52 PM PST by af_vet_rr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

To: aroundabout
Forgetting our land and sea based assets for the moment, we have enough destructive firepower on the 20-24 nuke submarines to destroy any number of bad guys countries. Each sub carries 24 missiles and each missile carries 10 warheads. Do the math, 24 boats x 24 missiles per boat x 10 warheads per missile = 5760 nuke warheads, each with more destructive power then the bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Now keep in mind this is NOT including our Navy or land based assets.

I'm sure our submariners will be surprised to learn they are not sea-based nor part of the Navy.

57 posted on 11/09/2007 9:58:06 AM PST by GATOR NAVY
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson