• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Pentagon conducts 1st test of previously banned missile

TU Curmudgeon

TU Curmudgeon

B.A. (Sarc), LLb. (Lex Sarcasus), PhD (Sarc.)
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 7, 2018
Messages
62,517
Reaction score
19,314
Location
Lower Mainland of BC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
From Associated Press

Pentagon conducts 1st test of previously banned missile
​

WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. military has conducted a flight test of a type of missile banned for more than 30 years by a treaty that both the United States and Russia abandoned this month, the Pentagon said.

The test off the coast of California on Sunday marked the resumption of an arms competition that some analysts worry could increase U.S.-Russian tensions. The Trump administration has said it remains interested in useful arms control but questions Moscow’s willingness to adhere to its treaty commitments.

The Pentagon said it tested a modified ground-launched version of a Navy Tomahawk cruise missile, which was launched from San Nicolas Island and accurately struck its target after flying more than 500 kilometers (310 miles). The missile was armed with a conventional, not nuclear, warhead.

Defense officials had said last March that this missile likely would have a range of about 1,000 kilometers (620 miles) and that it might be ready for deployment within 18 months.

COMMENT:-

While the Russians have been violating the INF treaty for years by secretly working on banned missiles, American creativity and ingenuity has been able to produce these missiles in a mere three weeks <SARC>
since America had conducted absolutely no development work on them until after the Russians destroyed the INF treaty by unilaterally abrogating it</SARC>.

Right?​
 
I actually find it completely believable you could yank a Tomahawk launcher out of a submarine, put it on a truck, and wire it up to fire in three weeks.
 
Deuce said:
I actually find it completely believable you could yank a Tomahawk launcher out of a submarine, put it on a truck, and wire it up to fire in three weeks.
Click to expand...

Our salesmen here at AKME Bridge and Highway Inc. would like to talk to you.
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
From Associated Press

Pentagon conducts 1st test of previously banned missile
​

WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. military has conducted a flight test of a type of missile banned for more than 30 years by a treaty that both the United States and Russia abandoned this month, the Pentagon said.

The test off the coast of California on Sunday marked the resumption of an arms competition that some analysts worry could increase U.S.-Russian tensions. The Trump administration has said it remains interested in useful arms control but questions Moscow’s willingness to adhere to its treaty commitments.

The Pentagon said it tested a modified ground-launched version of a Navy Tomahawk cruise missile, which was launched from San Nicolas Island and accurately struck its target after flying more than 500 kilometers (310 miles). The missile was armed with a conventional, not nuclear, warhead.

Defense officials had said last March that this missile likely would have a range of about 1,000 kilometers (620 miles) and that it might be ready for deployment within 18 months.

COMMENT:-

While the Russians have been violating the INF treaty for years by secretly working on banned missiles, American creativity and ingenuity has been able to produce these missiles in a mere three weeks <SARC>
since America had conducted absolutely no development work on them until after the Russians destroyed the INF treaty by unilaterally abrogating it</SARC>.

Right?​
Click to expand...


Yes. Clearly you're not well versed in the idea of American Exceptionalism.

:)
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
From Associated Press

Pentagon conducts 1st test of previously banned missile
​

WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. military has conducted a flight test of a type of missile banned for more than 30 years by a treaty that both the United States and Russia abandoned this month, the Pentagon said.

The test off the coast of California on Sunday marked the resumption of an arms competition that some analysts worry could increase U.S.-Russian tensions. The Trump administration has said it remains interested in useful arms control but questions Moscow’s willingness to adhere to its treaty commitments.

The Pentagon said it tested a modified ground-launched version of a Navy Tomahawk cruise missile, which was launched from San Nicolas Island and accurately struck its target after flying more than 500 kilometers (310 miles). The missile was armed with a conventional, not nuclear, warhead.

Defense officials had said last March that this missile likely would have a range of about 1,000 kilometers (620 miles) and that it might be ready for deployment within 18 months.

COMMENT:-

While the Russians have been violating the INF treaty for years by secretly working on banned missiles, American creativity and ingenuity has been able to produce these missiles in a mere three weeks <SARC>
since America had conducted absolutely no development work on them until after the Russians destroyed the INF treaty by unilaterally abrogating it</SARC>.

Right?​
Click to expand...

Probably or they were just on the drawing board. If it was a tomahawk then its a minor mod to allow it to be ground launched, its already launched from multiple platforms.
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
Our salesmen here at AKME Bridge and Highway Inc. would like to talk to you.
Click to expand...

It’s a weapons system that already exists. The guidance system and flight characteristics are all in the missile, presumably unchanged. There are already air-launched and sea-launched versions. Ground based is simpler by far. You could get by with just a big metal tube welded to a truck and a wire connecting to the booster rocket.

Edit: looking at photos, this is literally what they did. Rectangular metal tube bolted to a flatbed.
 
Last edited:
Eternal turn of the wheel. The arms race will escalate, again.
 
Obscurity said:
Eternal turn of the wheel. The arms race will escalate, again.
Click to expand...

But....there's no money for healthcare. Some people have very messed up priorities imo.
 
JustHanging said:
But....there's no money for healthcare. Some people have very messed up priorities imo.
Click to expand...

I believe medicare and medicaid combined exceed the DoD budget
 
Deuce said:
It’s a weapons system that already exists. The guidance system and flight characteristics are all in the missile, presumably unchanged. There are already air-launched and sea-launched versions. Ground based is simpler by far. You could get by with just a big metal tube welded to a truck and a wire connecting to the booster rocket.

Edit: looking at photos, this is literally what they did. Rectangular metal tube bolted to a flatbed.
Click to expand...

Strangely enough, this "new system" is almost precisely what the Russians had been complaining about when they accused the US of "violating the terms of the INF treaty" by developing "ground launched" missiles that were banned by the INF treaty.

This, however, is NOT to say that the Russians were ALSO doing the same sort of "violation".
 
Drawdown said:
I believe medicare and medicaid combined exceed the DoD budget
Click to expand...

The combined medicare/medicaid budget is $1,287.8 billion and the official defence budget is only $617 billion.

This proves that it costs more to keep 360 million people healthy than it does to prepare to kill 40 or 50 million "furrinerz".
 
Deuce said:
It’s a weapons system that already exists. The guidance system and flight characteristics are all in the missile, presumably unchanged. There are already air-launched and sea-launched versions. Ground based is simpler by far. You could get by with just a big metal tube welded to a truck and a wire connecting to the booster rocket.

Edit: looking at photos, this is literally what they did. Rectangular metal tube bolted to a flatbed.
Click to expand...

That makes sense. These are designed as a "wooden round", requiring little maintenance or support. They are in launch canisters loaded into ships (and submarines) and have a data cable attached. It seems pretty stratighforward to bolt that cannister to a truck instead of a ship, and attach the data cable.

search
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
From Associated Press

Pentagon conducts 1st test of previously banned missile
​

WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. military has conducted a flight test of a type of missile banned for more than 30 years by a treaty that both the United States and Russia abandoned this month, the Pentagon said.

The test off the coast of California on Sunday marked the resumption of an arms competition that some analysts worry could increase U.S.-Russian tensions. The Trump administration has said it remains interested in useful arms control but questions Moscow’s willingness to adhere to its treaty commitments.

The Pentagon said it tested a modified ground-launched version of a Navy Tomahawk cruise missile, which was launched from San Nicolas Island and accurately struck its target after flying more than 500 kilometers (310 miles). The missile was armed with a conventional, not nuclear, warhead.

Defense officials had said last March that this missile likely would have a range of about 1,000 kilometers (620 miles) and that it might be ready for deployment within 18 months.

COMMENT:-

While the Russians have been violating the INF treaty for years by secretly working on banned missiles, American creativity and ingenuity has been able to produce these missiles in a mere three weeks <SARC>
since America had conducted absolutely no development work on them until after the Russians destroyed the INF treaty by unilaterally abrogating it</SARC>.

Right?​
Click to expand...


Just like the "patriot" act was written In three days...
 
Deuce said:
I actually find it completely believable you could yank a Tomahawk launcher out of a submarine, put it on a truck, and wire it up to fire in three weeks.
Click to expand...

More likely a launcher from a ship. Note that each missle has it's own 'launcher' which is loaded into the ship and connected to the ship's systems. Not that much of a reach to bolt that same launch cannister to something on land.
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
From Associated Press

Pentagon conducts 1st test of previously banned missile
​

WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. military has conducted a flight test of a type of missile banned for more than 30 years by a treaty that both the United States and Russia abandoned this month, the Pentagon said.

The test off the coast of California on Sunday marked the resumption of an arms competition that some analysts worry could increase U.S.-Russian tensions. The Trump administration has said it remains interested in useful arms control but questions Moscow’s willingness to adhere to its treaty commitments.

The Pentagon said it tested a modified ground-launched version of a Navy Tomahawk cruise missile, which was launched from San Nicolas Island and accurately struck its target after flying more than 500 kilometers (310 miles). The missile was armed with a conventional, not nuclear, warhead.

Defense officials had said last March that this missile likely would have a range of about 1,000 kilometers (620 miles) and that it might be ready for deployment within 18 months.

COMMENT:-

While the Russians have been violating the INF treaty for years by secretly working on banned missiles, American creativity and ingenuity has been able to produce these missiles in a mere three weeks <SARC>
since America had conducted absolutely no development work on them until after the Russians destroyed the INF treaty by unilaterally abrogating it</SARC>.

Right?​
Click to expand...

I have no doubt that we desinge the tomahawk with this in mind. That doesn't necessarily mean we were violating the treaty by tesing these from land.

It is another interesting quirk (hypocrisy) in international relations for the US. Similar to influencing other countries through spying, hacking, and releasing political propaganda. We act shocked when it happens to us... but at the same time are doing this to other countries.
 
The Russians have been violating this treaty for a while. I however don't want an arms race with Intermediate nuclear weapons.

The Russians just created a disaster when one of their nuclear powered cruise missiles crashed and killed 7 scientists, while also spreading nuclear material over a wide area.
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
From Associated Press

Pentagon conducts 1st test of previously banned missile
​

WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. military has conducted a flight test of a type of missile banned for more than 30 years by a treaty that both the United States and Russia abandoned this month, the Pentagon said.

The test off the coast of California on Sunday marked the resumption of an arms competition that some analysts worry could increase U.S.-Russian tensions. The Trump administration has said it remains interested in useful arms control but questions Moscow’s willingness to adhere to its treaty commitments.

The Pentagon said it tested a modified ground-launched version of a Navy Tomahawk cruise missile, which was launched from San Nicolas Island and accurately struck its target after flying more than 500 kilometers (310 miles). The missile was armed with a conventional, not nuclear, warhead.

Defense officials had said last March that this missile likely would have a range of about 1,000 kilometers (620 miles) and that it might be ready for deployment within 18 months.

COMMENT:-

While the Russians have been violating the INF treaty for years by secretly working on banned missiles, American creativity and ingenuity has been able to produce these missiles in a mere three weeks <SARC>
since America had conducted absolutely no development work on them until after the Russians destroyed the INF treaty by unilaterally abrogating it</SARC>.

Right?​
Click to expand...

But without Greenland, what are they going to do with it?
 
MTAtech said:
The Russians have been violating this treaty for a while. I however don't want an arms race with Intermediate nuclear weapons.

The Russians just created a disaster when one of their nuclear powered cruise missiles crashed and killed 7 scientists, while also spreading nuclear material over a wide area.
Click to expand...

Indeed they did (although the correct term is "technical testing incident").

Since we now know that the Russians are working on engines that would allow their cruise missiles to approach the United States of America from any direction (up from the South Pole and over Mexico for example), you can be sure that defence R&D spending is going to positively zoom as (on the assumption that the Russians MIGHT succeed) the US is going to have to ring all of its borders with sufficient anti-missile defences to positively ensure that not a single Russian cruise missile could (even theoretically) get to the United States of America.

The one thing that you do have to remember about that is that that defence cost is going to have to be borne REGARDLESS of whether the Russians actually build any cruise missiles equipped with nuclear powered engines.

I won't tell you that the US "won the Cold War" by having the USSR spend itself into oblivion (and one of the methods was to develop potential threats that the USSR had to spend a whole lot more money defending against than the US had to spend to keep the potential threat viable) because that would be letting the Russians in on something that they are totally ignorant of and might try if they did know about it.

PS - That increase in defence R&D has to be paid for somehow. Can you guess whose pockets the money to pay for it is going to come? [ASIDE - I don't think that you are actually going to hear "America is going to build an impregnable wall against Russian missiles and the Russians are going to pay for it.".
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
Indeed they did (although the correct term is "technical testing incident").

Since we now know that the Russians are working on engines that would allow their cruise missiles to approach the United States of America from any direction (up from the South Pole and over Mexico for example), you can be sure that defence R&D spending is going to positively zoom as (on the assumption that the Russians MIGHT succeed) the US is going to have to ring all of its borders with sufficient anti-missile defences to positively ensure that not a single Russian cruise missile could (even theoretically) get to the United States of America.

The one thing that you do have to remember about that is that that defence cost is going to have to be borne REGARDLESS of whether the Russians actually build any cruise missiles equipped with nuclear powered engines.

I won't tell you that the US "won the Cold War" by having the USSR spend itself into oblivion (and one of the methods was to develop potential threats that the USSR had to spend a whole lot more money defending against than the US had to spend to keep the potential threat viable) because that would be letting the Russians in on something that they are totally ignorant of and might try if they did know about it.

PS - That increase in defence R&D has to be paid for somehow. Can you guess whose pockets the money to pay for it is going to come? [ASIDE - I don't think that you are actually going to hear "America is going to build an impregnable wall against Russian missiles and the Russians are going to pay for it.".
Click to expand...

What's the point? So, even if the Russians can use a cruise missile to hit the U.S., that's not anything they can't do now with an ICBM in 20 minutes. The same response from the U.S. -- nuclear retaliation.

What would be better spending is systems that can better detect slow flying (about 600 mph) cruise missiles. Given that they would take hours to reach their targets, they could be easily intercepted if detected.
 
MTAtech said:
What's the point? So, even if the Russians can use a cruise missile to hit the U.S., that's not anything they can't do now with an ICBM in 20 minutes.
Click to expand...

Quite right, but the US government has spent as much as it realistically can on "anti-ICBM" defence. The cruise missiles are a "NEW THREAT" that has to be countered (the public is bored with "The ICBM Threat" and doesn't knee-jerk for it any longer).

MTAtech said:
The same response from the U.S. -- nuclear retaliation.
Click to expand...

SHHHHHHHHHHHHhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Please do not tell people that the Russians already know that there is no way to "win" a nuclear war and so won't start one. If people start to believe that then you won't be able to stampede them into voting you tons and tons of lovely money in order to "prevent a nuclear war".

MTAtech said:
What would be better spending is systems that can better detect slow flying (about 600 mph) cruise missiles. Given that they would take hours to reach their targets, they could be easily intercepted if detected.
Click to expand...

And I am sure that the Russian government is fully supportive of the United States of America spending tons and tons of lovely money in order to "prevent" the Russians from carrying an attack that the Russians know would be suicidal (and would [most likely] leave China as the world's dominant economic power).
 
TU Curmudgeon said:
Strangely enough, this "new system" is almost precisely what the Russians had been complaining about when they accused the US of "violating the terms of the INF treaty" by developing "ground launched" missiles that were banned by the INF treaty.

This, however, is NOT to say that the Russians were ALSO doing the same sort of "violation".
Click to expand...

Tomahawks are not new.
 
Deuce said:
The "system" is a flatbed truck and a metal box. It is also not new.
Click to expand...

The combining of them is. Or it would have been a violation of the INF. That is what TE was trying to say
 
Lord Tammerlain said:
The combining of them is. Or it would have been a violation of the INF. That is what TE was trying to say
Click to expand...

He was also saying that couldn’t have been done so quickly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom