Anybody Remember the Neutron Bomb?

Status
Not open for further replies.
quikdraw67 said:
I wasn't aware that the neutron bomb was in service with any country. I remember when it was proposed, didn't know it was actually developed and deployed.
Click to expand...

It's not, at least publicly. Several countries have developed and tested it. Russia got whatever they may have from the old Soviet Union, but they don't claim to have a current program. We discontinued them in the early 90's. Hence, the hullabaloo . . .
 
arjay said:
It seems that the current regime in Russia has been so busy stealing and looting for the last 20 yrs that they would have let whatever they had degrade…
Click to expand...

That's unfair....they've been busy torturing noncombatants as well.

newFile-2.jpg

Box of teeth found in torture chamber as Vladimir Putin's forces retreat | Evening Standard
 
Last edited:
Beemerguy53 said:
That's because some people aren't content simply to discuss the weapons and tactics being used, and the daily progress the Ukrainians are making as they take back their country; they want to steer the discussion into a debate or argument over politics, or they want to promote Russia's position.

We had a thread on this war going for about six months, with thousands of posts, and it was a model of civility...until somebody hopped onto it and baited some of us (and I admit to being one of them) into an argument. I thought then, and still do, that his whole purpose was to get the thread shut down...and unfortunately, he succeeded.
Click to expand...
Yes, some want their pro-Putin cake and to eat it as well. Must have been Vladimir the Thread Closer, as one informed member identified him.

Or maybe some other guy.
 
Last edited:
Onomea said:
This article, written earlier in the war, on potential use of theater nuclear weapons, argues that Russia does not have escalation dominance, that we could respond proportionally at every escalation. (Also says, incidentally, that Russia does not have the neutron bomb.)

realcleardefense.com
Click to expand...

I looked that over and can't see where they say Russia does not have the neutron bomb.

How would they know whether or not Russia has the neutron bomb? Spies?

If you can give us a quote to clear up this question it would be very helpful.
 
This is a more recent article from the same source and it admits that Russia has neutron weapons and elaborates on consequences of use.

realcleardefense.com

The most likely use of nuclear weapons by Russia is not against Ukrainian cities but against the Ukrainian armed forces, to annihilate them and win the war. Tactical nuclear weapons are defined by their employment on the battlefield against enemy military formations, as well as by relatively low explosive yield, sometimes very low. This makes it possible to use them with greater discrimination and pinpoint targeting, potentially minimizing the destruction and killing of non-combatants. Tactical nuclear weapons of the 'neutron bomb' variety also minimizes contamination and the danger of fallout spreading into Russian territory. Precisely for these reasons, their use, and the crossing of the nuclear threshold, become more tempting.
Click to expand...
 
My take on this after a lot of research is this:

Russia has only two ways to win.

1. Letting Ukraine wear itself out with costly counteroffensives and letting a starvation winter (or even two starvation winters) sap the strength of the Ukrainians and their European helpers.

2. Use a barrage of neutron weapons to wipe out major concentrations of Ukrainian troops without radioactive contamination or major damage to infrastructure and weapons like tanks. Russia could then reclaim weapons like tanks and artillery.

This is the most dangerous option because we would probably provide neutron weapons to Ukraine and the possibility of escalation to strategic nuclear weapons would be great if Russian started to take heavy losses, possibly even INSIDE Russia.

In that case everybody would lose.
 
Last edited:
Couple of points of order:

1) When it comes to nukes, the people that really know what they or the other guy has in inventory aren't saying. For us outside that group to say we know who has what is a conceit I cannot share.

2) The stigma of being the first to pop some instant sunshine is such that I think even Putin knows it's a non-starter.

3) If 2) is wrong because Putin is either so determined not to be seen losing or is just stark staring mad, the consequences of same will make today's gas prices a non-issue.

Now, back to the game I recorded of my English soccer team coming from behind for a 3-1 victory. :)
 
Do people ever look at you while you're talking and just walk away?

Der Verminator said:
My take on this after a lot of research is this:

Russia has only two ways to win.

1. Letting Ukraine wear itself out with costly counteroffensives and letting a starvation winter (or even two starvation winters) sap the strength of the Ukrainians and their European helpers.

2. Use a barrage of neutron weapons to wipe out major concentrations of Ukrainian troops without radioactive contamination or major damage to infrastructure and weapons like tanks. Russia could then reclaim weapons like tanks and artillery.

This is the most dangerous option because we would probably provide neutron weapons to Ukraine and the possibility of escalation to strategic nuclear weapons would be great if Russian started to take heavy losses, possibly even INSIDE Russia.

In that case everybody would lose.
Click to expand...
 
Onomea said:
Seems to me the Russians used a thermobaric weapon at least once early on in the war...
Click to expand...

Ukraine said he did and said it killed 70 of their troops.

Don't know if it was ever confirmed.

Doesn't sound like a real game-changer of a weapon if he did use it.
 
Der Verminator said:
Thanks.

That's exactly what I was thinking.

Also, it destroys far less infrastructure which leaves less rebuilding for Russia when they take over.
Click to expand...

Ah, but rebuilding is the key to war. And without people for whom we claim to rebuild, it's pointless. Create a need (mass destruction), send gazillions of dollars, and the scammers get fabulously wealthy. War is a racket, said Smedley Butler.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top