Is there a reason they can’t use a conventional warhead to destroy a satellite? Even if they wanted to use it to attack a surface there isn’t a lot of evidence that a normal ICBM can be reliably intercepted so I doubt them being in space will change much.
A Republican is grand standing about information he’s being briefed on during a meeting scheduled for tomorrow.
So my Spidey sense says no. There is no reason to do what Turner did today. Unless you’re an idiot. Or you want to indirectly tell people such a briefing is happening.
Lately it means they tried, failed, but want people to think they’re still as capable as the Soviet Union. Which they aren’t. Haven’t been for decades. Much of Soviet engineering might came from Ukraine. It’s part of why Pootin so desperately wants to subjugate them again.
Not really. Almost every one of those, Russia withdrew first. A couple Russia broke years before finally even acknowledging the evidence collected.
And you didn’t know the response until reading this. Because the US/NATO are a defensive alliance. They didn’t go around bragging about flaunting these agreements like Russia has a few times.
Just in time for a potential second Trump presidency. Let’s make sure we have a bunch of cutting edge nuclear shit ready for him to use, steal and/or sell if he takes office. Great!
Add comment