Trump says US is ending decades-old nuclear arms treaty with Russia

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Paratus

Lifer
Jun 4, 2004
17,117
14,484
146
What good is a treaty if one party is violating it?
We should ask Mitch McConnell that.
jnHWXN4.gif
 

kage69

Lifer
Jul 17, 2003
28,746
40,188
136
That's mighty white of you.

Ever wonder why the dentist covers your nuts with a tiny little piece of lead cloth, and the steps into a lead encased bunker to xray your teeth?

If you say so. I made the call you were acting that way on purpose; sarcasm. But no, here you are acting like no one knows how radiation works, that putting lead paint on your house protects you from nuclear attack.

Should have worn gloves dude. And a mask. Maybe it could have spared you from making yourself look like an idiot, or that whole wishing death on someone for having a different opinion.
 
Last edited:
Feb 4, 2009
35,248
16,716
136
^^^lead paint made post 1950 barely has lead in it. Enough to be hazardous to your health but that’s about it.
 

Denly

Golden Member
May 14, 2011
1,433
229
106
I actually don't have a problem with this. I'd disagree with it had the Russians been abiding by it, but they look at arms agreements like they do international borders unfortunately.

I can see why they wouldn't move on this prior to Russia invading Crimea and Ukraine, but now that Putin has shown what he's willing to do, how bombing civilians and using chemical weapons on them is not a big deal - obligations that apply to us but not them need to be done away with.

"Allowing" Russia to upgrade? You guys are funny.

Not thread related but this somehow triggered me and you probably know why.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,266
126
^^^lead paint made post 1950 barely has lead in it. Enough to be hazardous to your health but that’s about it.


This doesn't really worry me as what our species is doing is much worse than a nuclear war and more likely to happen.
 

Viper1j

Diamond Member
Jul 31, 2018
4,264
3,840
136
If you say so. I made the call you were acting that way on purpose; sarcasm. But no, here you are acting like no one knows how radiation works, that putting lead paint on your house protects you from nuclear attack.

Should have worn gloves dude. And a mask. Maybe it could have spared you from making yourself look like an idiot, or that whole wishing death on someone for having a different opinion.

Supporting pulling out of nuclear agreements is wishing death on the planet. Opinion be damned.

And I did say the lead paint was for the windows.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie

pcgeek11

Lifer
Jun 12, 2005
21,632
4,685
136
Check out an old movie called The Day After.


LOL, using a movie for advice.

That lead paint may stop some Alpha and Beta. Then again paper will stop Alpha. Not going to help at all with the Gamma and Neutrons etc...
 
Feb 4, 2009
35,248
16,716
136
I hope so.

*While that movie certainly took estimates it did use some facts. I remember the scene with the farmers reading the emergency handbook and finding
“The soil is contaminated to grow but if you dig down 3 feet that soil is good”
They were all like how do we do that without bulldozers and almost all my horses are either dead or lame.
 

rise

Diamond Member
Dec 13, 2004
9,116
46
91
'Big, beautiful jobs making more nukes!'

So nukes non-proliferation talks with master putin at eh Helsinki Humiliation didn't pan out for the orangeclownpig, what a shock.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
The notion that the US should waste resources to create more nukes & launchers because the Russians are supposedly cheating is muy stupido. Actual use of current inventories would leave the northern hemisphere a smoking mess.
 

FIVR

Diamond Member
Jun 1, 2016
3,753
911
106
We need more nukes, not less. We gotta be able to be sure we will blow up every last living thing on the earth so it can restart and the stuff the evolves hopefully won't have the same retarded problems we evolved with. In order to be sure that every last living thing on the planet dies (down to the last tardigrade) we must use 1TRILLION GIGATONS of nukes and not 1 gigaton less.


Anything that gets more nukes into the hands of more Trumps or Putins or Jong Uns is good for the universe. This whole experiment here on earth has gone horribly wrong and it needs to stop right now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie
Feb 4, 2009
35,248
16,716
136
The notion that the US should waste resources to create more nukes & launchers because the Russians are supposedly cheating is muy stupido. Actual use of current inventories would leave the northern hemisphere a smoking mess.

One could make an argument they need to be upgraded.
Regardless, I don’t think trump is so retarded on this. If Russia is no abiding then why should we abide?
 
  • Like
Reactions: pcgeek11

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
One could make an argument they need to be upgraded.
Regardless, I don’t think trump is so retarded on this. If Russia is no abiding then why should we abide?

Because there's nothing gained in renouncing the treaty other than in domestic US politics. And maybe defense contracts. Keep the FUD level high enough to keep people voting irrationally. Tough Guy Trump!
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
One could make an argument they need to be upgraded.
Regardless, I don’t think trump is so retarded on this. If Russia is no abiding then why should we abide?
We're in the midst of upgrading the arsenal, anyway, but we're not creating or fielding this class of weapons. I seriously doubt our European allies want them deployed in their countries, anyway. They don't want that target on their backs.
 
Feb 4, 2009
35,248
16,716
136
Because there's nothing gained in renouncing the treaty other than in domestic US politics. And maybe defense contracts. Keep the FUD level high enough to keep people voting irrationally. Tough Guy Trump!

So what is the point & purpose of the treaty if neither party is bound to it?
 
  • Like
Reactions: pcgeek11

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
So what is the point & purpose of the treaty if neither party is bound to it?

This treaty does not exist in isolation. The US destabilized the situation by renouncing a treaty & deploying ABM's in Eastern Europe. From their perspective, they need to be able to overcome that in some fashion to have a credible deterrent to potential NATO aggression. The only credible answer in intermediate range cruise missiles. The demise of the Soviet Union & the Warsaw pact along with the rise of NATO has shifted the balance of convention forces very much against Russia. The resources & buffer zone against invasion from the West are gone.They're totally outgunned & rightfully paranoid about it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarthKyrie
Feb 4, 2009
35,248
16,716
136
This treaty does not exist in isolation. The US destabilized the situation by renouncing a treaty & deploying ABM's in Eastern Europe. From their perspective, they need to be able to overcome that in some fashion to have a credible deterrent to potential NATO aggression. The only credible answer in intermediate range cruise missiles. The demise of the Soviet Union & the Warsaw pact along with the rise of NATO has shifted the balance of convention forces very much against Russia. The resources & buffer zone against invasion from the West are gone.They're totally outgunned & rightfully paranoid about it.

So what’s the point & purpose of the treaty if neither party is bound to it?