• AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    See, he knows that if he uses nukes, the US gets dragged in. He also knows we don’t have to Nuke Moscow and St. Petersburg, to effectively nuke Moscow and St. Petersburg. We developed the MOAB so that we could get away with big bada booms, with no radioactive or political fallout. He also knows that Russia never developed these weapons.

    He’s stuck between and immovable object and an unstoppable force.

    • fake@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Nobody’s dropping a MOAB on Moscow, because it’s dropped out the back of a C-130.

      And even if they did it’s got less than 4% the yield of a B61, on it’s lowest setting, that fits inside an F-35. On it’s highest setting the B61 is 30,000 times more yield.

      Conventional explosives are toys compared to nukes.

      • AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        They are toys compared to nukes, but I guarantee if we wanted to use the toys because radiation = more political backlash, we could easily escort two wings of C-130 transports to both cities. When the US wants to bomb something, well there’s not a whole hell of a lot that anyone can do to stop it, unfortunately.