Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (Cyborg)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Brand Logo

CIRCLE WITH A DOT

  1. Home
  2. Uncategorized
  3. Oh good grief, this summary is both farcical and tragic: also, Trump has fucked air travel for at least the next two years, never mind automobiles and logistics.

Oh good grief, this summary is both farcical and tragic: also, Trump has fucked air travel for at least the next two years, never mind automobiles and logistics.

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Uncategorized
89 Posts 35 Posters 0 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • etchedpixels@mastodon.socialE etchedpixels@mastodon.social

    @rpluim @cstross Manhattan wil be under water in 50 years anyway at current rates.

    The previous Iranian leader issued a fatwah prohibiting nuclear weapon usage but they blew him up so who knows

    Seems they like finely calculated responses. Like the DIego Garcia attack when Starmer decided to help the US. Easy to shoot down but the clear message being "actually we can hit London if we want"

    And for the world cup they just need to blow up one stadium that's empty just before a game.

    rpluim@mastodon.socialR This user is from outside of this forum
    rpluim@mastodon.socialR This user is from outside of this forum
    rpluim@mastodon.social
    wrote last edited by
    #23

    @etchedpixels @cstross Is a bunch of enriched uranium combined with conventional explosives a "nuclear weapon"? I suspect radioactive uranium dust is pretty nasty, especially in large quantities.

    cstross@wandering.shopC julesjones@mendeddrum.orgJ 2 Replies Last reply
    0
    • jer@chirp.enworld.orgJ jer@chirp.enworld.org

      @cstross @isaackuo I think its even simpler - Iranian leadership has been planning for this for 50 years and are clearly prepared to extract maximum pain from the world until the us is stopped.

      Meanwhile us leadership appears to have thrown out 50 years of knowledge about Iran, strategic alliances, soft economic power, and every other advantage they had that wasn't "more expensive weapons" and started a war with about 5 seconds of thought

      More planning went into the Iraq War for fucks sake

      jmax@mastodon.socialJ This user is from outside of this forum
      jmax@mastodon.socialJ This user is from outside of this forum
      jmax@mastodon.social
      wrote last edited by
      #24

      @Jer @cstross @isaackuo 5 seconds is generous. I suspect imaginary numbers are necessary to quantify the planning for this one.

      nowster@fedi.nowster.me.ukN 1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • jer@chirp.enworld.orgJ jer@chirp.enworld.org

        @cstross @isaackuo I think its even simpler - Iranian leadership has been planning for this for 50 years and are clearly prepared to extract maximum pain from the world until the us is stopped.

        Meanwhile us leadership appears to have thrown out 50 years of knowledge about Iran, strategic alliances, soft economic power, and every other advantage they had that wasn't "more expensive weapons" and started a war with about 5 seconds of thought

        More planning went into the Iraq War for fucks sake

        isaackuo@spacey.spaceI This user is from outside of this forum
        isaackuo@spacey.spaceI This user is from outside of this forum
        isaackuo@spacey.space
        wrote last edited by
        #25

        @Jer @cstross Be that as it may, Iranian leadership could do nothing but vaguely hunker down and wait for the bombs to stop raining ... and they'd still win.

        1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • jer@chirp.enworld.orgJ jer@chirp.enworld.org

          @cstross @isaackuo I think its even simpler - Iranian leadership has been planning for this for 50 years and are clearly prepared to extract maximum pain from the world until the us is stopped.

          Meanwhile us leadership appears to have thrown out 50 years of knowledge about Iran, strategic alliances, soft economic power, and every other advantage they had that wasn't "more expensive weapons" and started a war with about 5 seconds of thought

          More planning went into the Iraq War for fucks sake

          elricofmelnibone@mastodon.socialE This user is from outside of this forum
          elricofmelnibone@mastodon.socialE This user is from outside of this forum
          elricofmelnibone@mastodon.social
          wrote last edited by
          #26

          @Jer "Until the US is stopped"? And who's going to stop them? The only way this ends is from within the US. There is zero chance of an external party forcing the US to see reason. Their poltical leadership is too far down the shitter.

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • rpluim@mastodon.socialR rpluim@mastodon.social

            @etchedpixels @cstross Is a bunch of enriched uranium combined with conventional explosives a "nuclear weapon"? I suspect radioactive uranium dust is pretty nasty, especially in large quantities.

            cstross@wandering.shopC This user is from outside of this forum
            cstross@wandering.shopC This user is from outside of this forum
            cstross@wandering.shop
            wrote last edited by
            #27

            @rpluim @etchedpixels Turns out Iran's HEU stockpile last year was ALREADY bomb-ready, it would just need somewhat more of it to assemble a critical mass than top-flight fully-enriched U235.

            1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • rpluim@mastodon.socialR rpluim@mastodon.social

              @etchedpixels @cstross Is a bunch of enriched uranium combined with conventional explosives a "nuclear weapon"? I suspect radioactive uranium dust is pretty nasty, especially in large quantities.

              julesjones@mendeddrum.orgJ This user is from outside of this forum
              julesjones@mendeddrum.orgJ This user is from outside of this forum
              julesjones@mendeddrum.org
              wrote last edited by
              #28

              @rpluim @etchedpixels @cstross You wouldn't even need a lot of conventional explosives, if you know how to re-enact assorted industrial disasters in the UK over the last fifty years and place a few innocent looking oil drums full of metal powder in strategic locations ahead of time. Imagine how much fun Flixborough would have been with bonus uranium dust.

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • cstross@wandering.shopC cstross@wandering.shop

                RE: https://infosec.exchange/@bontchev/116271481696841313

                Oh good grief, this summary is both farcical and tragic: also, Trump has fucked air travel for at least the next two years, never mind automobiles and logistics. The supply chain shock will get as bad as 2022 within a couple of months—then keep getting worse.

                sundew@beige.partyS This user is from outside of this forum
                sundew@beige.partyS This user is from outside of this forum
                sundew@beige.party
                wrote last edited by
                #29

                @cstross I mean... yay?

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • jer@chirp.enworld.orgJ jer@chirp.enworld.org

                  @cstross @isaackuo I think its even simpler - Iranian leadership has been planning for this for 50 years and are clearly prepared to extract maximum pain from the world until the us is stopped.

                  Meanwhile us leadership appears to have thrown out 50 years of knowledge about Iran, strategic alliances, soft economic power, and every other advantage they had that wasn't "more expensive weapons" and started a war with about 5 seconds of thought

                  More planning went into the Iraq War for fucks sake

                  otmar@infosec.exchangeO This user is from outside of this forum
                  otmar@infosec.exchangeO This user is from outside of this forum
                  otmar@infosec.exchange
                  wrote last edited by
                  #30

                  @Jer @cstross @isaackuo and now Trump is trying to out-escalate religious fanatics whose fetish is martyrdom.

                  Ain't going to work.

                  jer@chirp.enworld.orgJ 1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • otmar@infosec.exchangeO otmar@infosec.exchange

                    @Jer @cstross @isaackuo and now Trump is trying to out-escalate religious fanatics whose fetish is martyrdom.

                    Ain't going to work.

                    jer@chirp.enworld.orgJ This user is from outside of this forum
                    jer@chirp.enworld.orgJ This user is from outside of this forum
                    jer@chirp.enworld.org
                    wrote last edited by
                    #31

                    @otmar @cstross @isaackuo I mean, religious fanatics whose fetish is martyrdom (for others) riddle the Trump administration. The us secretary of "war" belongs to a Christian apocalypse cult. The us military- especially the Air Force - is completely overrun with them at all levels

                    Too many people think they can trigger the End Times by starting the right kind of wars and that coloring all of this too

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • jmax@mastodon.socialJ jmax@mastodon.social

                      @Jer @cstross @isaackuo 5 seconds is generous. I suspect imaginary numbers are necessary to quantify the planning for this one.

                      nowster@fedi.nowster.me.ukN This user is from outside of this forum
                      nowster@fedi.nowster.me.ukN This user is from outside of this forum
                      nowster@fedi.nowster.me.uk
                      wrote last edited by
                      #32
                      @jmax@mastodon.social @Jer@chirp.enworld.org @cstross@wandering.shop @isaackuo@spacey.space Planck time. As in "as thick as two short plancks".
                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • isaackuo@spacey.spaceI isaackuo@spacey.space

                        @cstross Trump and the people around him are absolute morons, yes, but there is a weird motivated thinking desire among many to breathlessly claim US military hardware - which Trump had no hand in the development of - somehow sucks.

                        The F-35, for all its infamous flaws, is working better than experts expected. It was never designed to be fully stealthy - it emits radar so it can see and shoot at enemy aircraft.

                        And SM-3 continues to be phenomenal.

                        But the awesome performance of some systems

                        nohatcoder@mastodon.gamedev.placeN This user is from outside of this forum
                        nohatcoder@mastodon.gamedev.placeN This user is from outside of this forum
                        nohatcoder@mastodon.gamedev.place
                        wrote last edited by
                        #33

                        @isaackuo @cstross It is not that they are bad planes per se, they just don't deliver $100M worth of fighting power. And it is basically the same story with everything that is more advanced than a rifle, it is way too expensive, leading to way too few items being produced for a war at scale. SM-3 sounds great as an anti-ICBM weapon, but if you need them against intermediate range misiles as well, a stockpile of 100 or so could run out rather quickly.

                        isaackuo@spacey.spaceI 1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • cstross@wandering.shopC cstross@wandering.shop

                          RE: https://infosec.exchange/@bontchev/116271481696841313

                          Oh good grief, this summary is both farcical and tragic: also, Trump has fucked air travel for at least the next two years, never mind automobiles and logistics. The supply chain shock will get as bad as 2022 within a couple of months—then keep getting worse.

                          lazarou@mastodon.socialL This user is from outside of this forum
                          lazarou@mastodon.socialL This user is from outside of this forum
                          lazarou@mastodon.social
                          wrote last edited by
                          #34

                          @cstross See how the 'Master Race' fucks up everything it touches....

                          #Whiteness #WhiteNationalism

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • nohatcoder@mastodon.gamedev.placeN nohatcoder@mastodon.gamedev.place

                            @isaackuo @cstross It is not that they are bad planes per se, they just don't deliver $100M worth of fighting power. And it is basically the same story with everything that is more advanced than a rifle, it is way too expensive, leading to way too few items being produced for a war at scale. SM-3 sounds great as an anti-ICBM weapon, but if you need them against intermediate range misiles as well, a stockpile of 100 or so could run out rather quickly.

                            isaackuo@spacey.spaceI This user is from outside of this forum
                            isaackuo@spacey.spaceI This user is from outside of this forum
                            isaackuo@spacey.space
                            wrote last edited by
                            #35

                            @NohatCoder @cstross F-35s do absolutely deliver $100M worth of fighting power. The initial costs are remarkably low compared to other fighter jets, that provide a lot less capability.

                            HOWEVER, the running costs of the F-35 are not great, and it's a reason why we're spending money on F-15X (which actually costs more than F-35, but the running costs are lower).

                            SM-3 costs a lot, but still less than the ballistic missiles they shoot down. And they're also a lot smaller and the magazine depth of

                            isaackuo@spacey.spaceI 1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • isaackuo@spacey.spaceI isaackuo@spacey.space

                              @NohatCoder @cstross F-35s do absolutely deliver $100M worth of fighting power. The initial costs are remarkably low compared to other fighter jets, that provide a lot less capability.

                              HOWEVER, the running costs of the F-35 are not great, and it's a reason why we're spending money on F-15X (which actually costs more than F-35, but the running costs are lower).

                              SM-3 costs a lot, but still less than the ballistic missiles they shoot down. And they're also a lot smaller and the magazine depth of

                              isaackuo@spacey.spaceI This user is from outside of this forum
                              isaackuo@spacey.spaceI This user is from outside of this forum
                              isaackuo@spacey.space
                              wrote last edited by
                              #36

                              @NohatCoder @cstross the hundreds of destroyers and cruisers the USA and Japan have is such that it's not really realistic for Russia or China to saturate them, much less Iran or North Korea.

                              SM-3 also has a range of thousands of kilometers, which is an order of magnitude greater than other BMD missiles.

                              Basically, the fantasy Star Wars missile defense POTUS Reagan dreamed of ... became real. Not overnight, but over decades.

                              Aegis BMD is truly a "game changer".

                              cstross@wandering.shopC nohatcoder@mastodon.gamedev.placeN 2 Replies Last reply
                              0
                              • isaackuo@spacey.spaceI isaackuo@spacey.space

                                @NohatCoder @cstross the hundreds of destroyers and cruisers the USA and Japan have is such that it's not really realistic for Russia or China to saturate them, much less Iran or North Korea.

                                SM-3 also has a range of thousands of kilometers, which is an order of magnitude greater than other BMD missiles.

                                Basically, the fantasy Star Wars missile defense POTUS Reagan dreamed of ... became real. Not overnight, but over decades.

                                Aegis BMD is truly a "game changer".

                                cstross@wandering.shopC This user is from outside of this forum
                                cstross@wandering.shopC This user is from outside of this forum
                                cstross@wandering.shop
                                wrote last edited by
                                #37

                                @isaackuo @NohatCoder Noted: Reagan's "star wars" pipedream was mooted in 1984. That's nearly 50 years ago! The tech arrived incrementally, in a steady drip. It still won't suffice to block a full-scale strategic attack by a superpower, but for anything much short of that, it's changed the rules of the game.

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • rpluim@mastodon.socialR rpluim@mastodon.social

                                  @etchedpixels @cstross The worst case I've seen suggested is Iran setting off a dirty bomb in an important population centre (do they have any plutonium?), thus rendering it uninhabitable for centuries. Somewhere like Manhattan or the City would be awful

                                  leeloo@c.imL This user is from outside of this forum
                                  leeloo@c.imL This user is from outside of this forum
                                  leeloo@c.im
                                  wrote last edited by
                                  #38

                                  @rpluim @etchedpixels @cstross
                                  Does it matter if they have plutonium?

                                  Do they have Shaheeds? Yes
                                  Is Russia willing to pay for them? Yes

                                  What is the Shaheed to plutonium exchange rate on the black market?

                                  1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • cstross@wandering.shopC cstross@wandering.shop

                                    RE: https://infosec.exchange/@bontchev/116271481696841313

                                    Oh good grief, this summary is both farcical and tragic: also, Trump has fucked air travel for at least the next two years, never mind automobiles and logistics. The supply chain shock will get as bad as 2022 within a couple of months—then keep getting worse.

                                    photo55@mastodon.socialP This user is from outside of this forum
                                    photo55@mastodon.socialP This user is from outside of this forum
                                    photo55@mastodon.social
                                    wrote last edited by
                                    #39

                                    @cstross
                                    I wonder if he will end up having reduced the CO2 emissions of the planet.
                                    Hard to tell, plus Methane leaks.

                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • isaackuo@spacey.spaceI isaackuo@spacey.space

                                      @NohatCoder @cstross the hundreds of destroyers and cruisers the USA and Japan have is such that it's not really realistic for Russia or China to saturate them, much less Iran or North Korea.

                                      SM-3 also has a range of thousands of kilometers, which is an order of magnitude greater than other BMD missiles.

                                      Basically, the fantasy Star Wars missile defense POTUS Reagan dreamed of ... became real. Not overnight, but over decades.

                                      Aegis BMD is truly a "game changer".

                                      nohatcoder@mastodon.gamedev.placeN This user is from outside of this forum
                                      nohatcoder@mastodon.gamedev.placeN This user is from outside of this forum
                                      nohatcoder@mastodon.gamedev.place
                                      wrote last edited by
                                      #40

                                      @isaackuo @cstross Yes, all the other planes are also way too expensive. When Iran has only been able to shoot down 2 planes, the reason is that US and Israel have attacked primarily with land/ship-launched missiles, and possibly some plane-launched missiles and glide bombs. The planes are too vulnerable to get close to any target with a working AA system, that includes 1970's USSR spec.

                                      isaackuo@spacey.spaceI fazalmajid@social.vivaldi.netF 2 Replies Last reply
                                      0
                                      • nohatcoder@mastodon.gamedev.placeN nohatcoder@mastodon.gamedev.place

                                        @isaackuo @cstross Yes, all the other planes are also way too expensive. When Iran has only been able to shoot down 2 planes, the reason is that US and Israel have attacked primarily with land/ship-launched missiles, and possibly some plane-launched missiles and glide bombs. The planes are too vulnerable to get close to any target with a working AA system, that includes 1970's USSR spec.

                                        isaackuo@spacey.spaceI This user is from outside of this forum
                                        isaackuo@spacey.spaceI This user is from outside of this forum
                                        isaackuo@spacey.space
                                        wrote last edited by
                                        #41

                                        @NohatCoder @cstross Uhh no. 1970s era USSR SAMs have practically no chance of hitting an F-35, and little chance of hitting various 4th gen jets (thanks to ECM and countermeasures). I mean, assuming well trained pilots.

                                        An F-35 is much more difficult to detect and track on radar than the (much older technology) Tomahawk cruise missiles that were expended at great expense in the initial wave of attacks.

                                        Why did the US military do this? I don't know, but it could easily have been stupidity

                                        isaackuo@spacey.spaceI 1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • isaackuo@spacey.spaceI isaackuo@spacey.space

                                          @NohatCoder @cstross Uhh no. 1970s era USSR SAMs have practically no chance of hitting an F-35, and little chance of hitting various 4th gen jets (thanks to ECM and countermeasures). I mean, assuming well trained pilots.

                                          An F-35 is much more difficult to detect and track on radar than the (much older technology) Tomahawk cruise missiles that were expended at great expense in the initial wave of attacks.

                                          Why did the US military do this? I don't know, but it could easily have been stupidity

                                          isaackuo@spacey.spaceI This user is from outside of this forum
                                          isaackuo@spacey.spaceI This user is from outside of this forum
                                          isaackuo@spacey.space
                                          wrote last edited by
                                          #42

                                          @NohatCoder @cstross driven by Hegseth and/or Trump himself.

                                          But then, they were expecting Iran to surrender within the first few hours, or maybe days, so who knows?

                                          Anyway, USS Ford having clogged toilets had an "effect" on the viability of F-35 round the clock bombing of Iran anyway.

                                          These are things which COULD have been ... I dunno ... PLANNED about and for. But Hegseth and Trump are just so stupid.

                                          nohatcoder@mastodon.gamedev.placeN 1 Reply Last reply
                                          0
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Tags
                                          • Popular
                                          • World
                                          • Users
                                          • Groups