Royal Marine Reacts To How would the United States Fight a Nuclear War?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 10 сен 2024
- Original Video (How would the United States Fight a Nuclear War?)
• How would the United S...
DREADNOUGHT MEADERY!
RUclips: / @dreadnoughtmeadery
Instagram: / dreadnoughtmeadery
BECOME A MEMBER
www.youtube.co...
SOCIALS
►Instagram @OriginalHuman_
►Twitter: @OriginalHuman_
►Discord: / discord
►Facebook: / originalhuman.videos
►Business inquires: originalhumanbusiness@gmail.com
OTHER CHANNELS
►The Sword And Scabbard: / @theswordandscabbard7909
►OriginalAdventures: / channel
►OriginalHuman Geek: / @originalhumangeek .
.
MY EQUIPMENT:
Camera: amzn.to/3W9dL37
Lights: amzn.to/3JtLflf
Key Board: amzn.to/3JpPWwx
Headphones: amzn.to/3JrF15x
Mouse: amzn.to/49P81ij
Monitors: amzn.to/4aLd1FP
Mic: amzn.to/3U7XWXY
Audio mixer: amzn.to/4b2FJSr
StreamDeck: amzn.to/4b4lHH1
Favorite Books:
Norse Mythology: Neil Gaiman
amzn.to/4b24Ftc
The Way of Kings: Brandon Sanderson
amzn.to/3JyHIlu
Breath: James Nestor
amzn.to/3Jur9Y7
We Are Nature: Ray Mears
amzn.to/3JurhXB
The Last Kingdom: Bernard Cornwell
amzn.to/3w4JjN0
Love how bro is saying "what we have" now that he's an American citizen, awesome dude, glad you're 1 of us now also.
It's an honor to have em on our side
UK and America share very similar values. It also helps that there isn't a language barrier between our two countries.
Well the UK is a member of NATO. So it is very much a "we" situation. If America gets sucked into WWIII the UK gets sucked in by default.
Yes, it’s always a pleasure adding a new citizen. That is a decent upstanding human being.
Brothers in arms^
As an old US Navy veteran I can tell you that our Ohio Class Nuclear submarines are the ultimate "hole card". Period!
There's no winning in a nuclear war. But each countries nuclear forces has just one mission. "Make the other guy loose harder"
Exactly, playing a game of poker or chess, you don't give too many details. Scary to think of the things hidden from publics' eye.
I used to live near Minot ND at my grandparents house in the countryside. One of the silos was literally right next to their mailbox. We would occasionally see the military transport missles in and out of these silos, either for maintenance or rotation. But it would be a large convoy of Humvees and a truck with a huge trailer that would tip up over the silo and lower the missles into it. It was kinda neat to watch. My mother went to pick up the mail one time, and she had to wait for them to finish because they were blocking the entrance to the road our mailbox was on.
@Willam_J Man, that's unfortunate! But yeah, it does sound kinda funny! My grandpa was a veteran and he used to have appointments at the VA on base. Couple times I got to go with him, it was pretty neat
That must’ve been really cool to see. Such a unique location to have lived.
B2 notoriously took off from Missouri flew to Iraq dropped bombs and landed back in Missouri!!!! Thats insanity
The one thing to keep in mind slbm commander's know once they launch , the sound signature is gonna get them killed from fast attack subs
For a first strike it would only make sense to walk nukes into the target simultaneously addressing inbound missiles.
You were talking about that no one really “wins” a nuclear war. Funny you say that because there is a great video called “America’s Nuclear Warriors” that you should react to. It’s an outstanding video that explains how America would, indeed, “win” a nuclear war. I just happened to think about it when you said that comment.
"America doesn't makes sense, America makes dollars" -the fat electrician.
We spend those dollars on the war machine.
Hey bro I was SETAF South European Task Force in Vicenza Italy and I was a MP. The feeling on base is as relaxed a a nice park in a nice neighborhood but the security is tight and those tasked with guarding the base don’t play, they will kill you if need be. I also guarded nukes overseas (can’t say where) it looks quiet and peaceful but you would have a better chance of counting each grain of sand on a beach in a hurricane than getting near those weapons
Our Alien Allies are our super secret wespon!
Small town PA man. My school district still has an active nuclear bomb shelter in its basement for two reasons. Our factories do both military and civil contracts, and how close to DC we are.
You should watch the next vids! And yes they’ve come out already :)
Yeah, a huge benefit for the US having its ICBMS in the center of the US is that they’re in lowly populated areas, meaning one would have to use hundreds of warheads to take out the missile silos and then even more to target military bases and then would most likely be depleted of nukes by the time major cities were left nearly undefended.
pausing at 5:06 the Minuteman III doesn't just carry one warhead. they carry multiple. M.I.R.V. (Multiple Individually targettable Re-entry Vehicle) every warhead it carries can be assigned a different target. so 1 missle could strike 3 cities, or more. (depending on it's loadout)
Edit: at least that's my understanding of them. He didn't mention MIRV until he got to the SLBM's. (I could be wrong, any Air Force who can {if not breaking opsec} want to correct me please do so)
the US is currently keeping single reentry vehicle modified missiles in line with the New START treaty (700 deployed missiles and bombers, 1,550 deployed warheads)
@@SpiceVisuals now that START ( at least i think it was START that Russia via Putin said they were no longer going to honor) isn't a thing anymore. I expect that to change in the near future. I mean we already have medium mobile launchers we're sending or have sent to Philippines.
Bro only SLBM's carry MIRV's, minuteman 3's used to but the MIRV's got moved to SLBM's due to that deal they did after the cold war to reduce nuclear warheads.
@@user-lh5ou1kp6h ahh..gotcha. last time I knew anything about this was the MMIII's had them as well. thanks for the correction and knowledge. 😄
We're untouchable as fat as homeland security
My friend, why would you even ask if we want to see a response to the second video? Absolutely! The look on your face when it showed those final missiles inbound…can’t wait! Thank you .
....I like you 😅. Welcome to the hometeam 💪🏾
Fmr USN combat veteran 10yrs
Operation Enduring Freedom
You should definitely cover the entire thing. This is a horrific topic that needs to be better understood.
would be interesting to see what part two would look like.
There's no limit to bomber range, because they can all refuel in flight, and have multiple pilots onboard.
Any base which houses US nukes is nearly impossible to get onto, so a surprise attack isn't going to happen.
Yes to the UFO'S video, sir.
Each ICBM site is 25 miles apart from each other
"this is what we know the United States has got, because I guarantee there's a lot more stuff that we don't know about". The Pentagon hasn't passed an audit, not even once 😂
strategic ambiguity
You know what's scary. Most soldiers don't want nuclear weapons to be used at all, but 1 president from either side hold the fate of everyone with 1 button
I’ve been to the Navy Submarine Base Bangor Washington and they’re strick
2:30, WWI wasn't about Austria and Serbia very much either, it was still a catalyst
Notice they did not mention the mx with the 10 independent self targeting heads
Last year I had de opportunity to travel to Miramar MCAS in San Diego as an attendant to the airshow.
As a foreigner to the USA, you do not have any idea about the true power of America´s armed forces until you witness it firsthand. It is such a powerfull country. I bet that if you live there your entire life, you wouldn´t even notice it because it is everywhere.
I am Mexican, currently living in Mexico, but I plan to move to the US sometime soon. I really feel it like a second home.
And we Americans welcome you as you enter our country as we do yours legally :)
@lifeisgood3589 Yeah I agree. As longs as it is legal, it's okay.
We too are having an immigration crisis. But our government seems to be getting overly considerate with them...
Its wrong to say SSBN have no disadvantages. The biggest disadvantage is that they cannot remain at sea indefinitely. The crew only has a few weeks supply of food and the sub needs to return to port for maintenance regularly. You can never have all 16 SSBN at sea at the same time, there will always been some in port for refit, resupply, training etc.
Furthermore you also need to allow for the subs transit times to get into patrol position they are vulnerable during transit.
Lastly is the threat of SSN Hunter Killer submarines whom are specifically designed to track and kill SSBN. Most of the major Navies have SSNs or their Diesel-Electric equivariant.
I would bet there are more ICBMs than that. I live in utah and in the west dessert where its just mostly empty flat ground you will run into these sections of land marked off with tall barbwire fences and signs saying if you cross the fence deadly force will be used , similar to the ones found at many military bases. If you look with binoculars or spotting scope from a hill top you can see vents sticking out of the ground. I suspect they are ICBM bases, have never seen anything done with the land at all, no military aircraft, or people near where these spots are.
Please do videos on the UAP crisis that congress is now investigating!! The secrets of advanced reversed-engineered tech need to be talked about!!!
I was stationed at RAF Alconbury, Cambs UK. We had bombers coming in and out all the time. We had nucs there. Alconbury is no longer there. I was there for four years. I was in the security police guarding the nucs. Let me tell you, you would have had to have a large army to get anywhere near the bombers or our nucs!
What the US military does that the Russians do not is periodically remove the ICBM missiles from their silos to do "maintenance" on them.
The nuclear material contained within the warheads does degrade over time.
It is called HALF LIFE.
They "refresh" the warheads to keep them at top yield potential.
Most all of Russia's arsenal may have significantly reduced outputs or yields if they even function at all.
There is a RUclips video which explains all this.
US Citizen or not I see the British as our brothers. I’ll see y’all when we’re drafted for ww3 😂
Im glad you gave that preface because none of the numbers here are accurate and neither is the actual strategy
When you said "twenteh" I felt that 😂❤
It would only take a couple days to drop in the necessary hardware to make the B1 a nuclear bomber, AGAIN., as originally designed, let’s not forget about the F35, and the Tomahawk cruise missile original purpose
Its incredibly difficult to react and target a reentry vehicle in its terminal stage. Usa does have THAAD etc but the success rate is estimated to be less than 10% and thats just hit rate...Mainly due to the decoy warheads etc each russian MIRV carries it reduces each interceptors effectiveness. In short usa will not be able to shoot them out the sky. Unfortunately MAD is still the only thing creatihg security by prevention/ deterrence
And that's when we use the UFOs right?😅
You should probably speak to an army air defense guy before commenting as though you are in the know. You’re clearly not.
Not anywhere did I claim such a thing. Anyway I was refering to success rate against ICBMS (2 out of 16 back in early 2000s)not ballistic missiles where it does have a 100% interception rate in tests. Ultimately no matter what me or you say there is no reliable defense again ICBMs. This Is just a RUclips comment posted by someone interested in this topic . Stop overthinking things.
@@McRizzle23ICBMs are ballistic missiles. Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles. LOL
@@keith9716 any missle that stays within the earth's atmosphere is classed as an SRBM (short range ballistic missile ) while an ICBM leaves the earth's atmosphere on its trajectory. So if you want to simplify it any missile is ballistic yes but that's not the point here... ICBMS are significantly harder to intercept due to its trajectory becoming sub orbital before re entry.
Oh... Do the UFO stuff . Its fun!🤣🤣
I've been on a couple Air Force bases in South Korea and security there is tighter than i've ever seen before on a base.
We have B2's at the base in Hawaii.......
Please react to the second video. It gives a lot more information in more detail because it's focused on a singular target.
We have more silo locations and some are in Kansas, Iowa, Missouri, and Alabama (government facility there in Huntsville)
please do part 2
Been to that base in Bahrain
As a US veteran, i have been to US Bases in Europe and they have relatively relaxed security similar to how they are within the US. I was at Camp lemmonier in Djibouti and that was high security
I've gone through gates here in the US totally wasted drunk and got through no problem. More than a few times I've been waived through without even showing my CAC.
My dad was career USAF. He was stationed (among many other places) at Barksdale, Torrejón AFB ( outside Madrid , Spain) and Zaragoza AFB (outside Zaragoza, Spain).
wanna see pt. 2👍
I’m not watching this until I see that part 2 was also uploaded…
well here is something new... F-35's are now Nuclear launch capable
Love these videos!
as for the "stuff we dont know" remember the pentagon loses trillions all the time
My estimation (i paused when you said “prediction”):
“They wouldn’t be able to target enough areas to NOT be concerned about the remaining survivors.”
Edit: Bahrain’s security level compared to any given NATO base:
Bahrain 3/10 -> NATO: 9/10
If it gives you any idea, the B52s that launched cruise missles on Baghdad were launched from Barksdale AFB...
Beyond in trouble In trouble is ways you do not know
Please react to the operations room I think you’ll really enjoy it!
As a rule to follow. If this information is released you can bet there are 10x in upgrades or even more added
The reason why the US has their silos in the center of the country (at least to my knowledge) is to protect the major civilian populations on the east and west coast. If we get attacked the enemy will have to expend many of thier nukes to disable our response. Any missile not hitting a major city is thousands of lives saved.
Security is tighter in Lakenheath than Bahrain from what I remember
how to startup a RUclips react channel must be part of the royal marines basic training it seems like they all have one
Military background here in the US means at least 15 20 years or more in the Military as an officer, Special Ops or High Ranking Official. Here if you just served your minimum duty in the military doesn't qualify as a Military Background. Just letting you know the difference between the US Military Training and serving versus other countries.
LG-35A Sentinel will replace the Minuteman III by 2029.
@OriginalHuman
The answer to your question how relaxed are these places in a NATO country they are not. My Step Dad served as a Jet Mech. on an Air Craft Carrier and in one instance he saw one of these being transported off the ship while being escorted by 12 to 15 armed marines down a corridor and a captain had stepped out in front of this transport and got hit in the face with the butt of a rifle. My Step Dad said that he found out later that those Marines have the Authority to shoot anyone who gets in there way when dealing with such weapons.
Silos are strategic targets, cant put em in NYC, NYC is a countervalue target to who different thing
“There is nothing more American than being an immigrant, right?”
No, being a citizen who love his country and lives in it and works/votes to make it better is being an American
I mean would we miss La that much hahah 14:12
That's a lot of parking lots
Lets see the second one.
I remember being told it wasnt about fighting one war and winning it was about fighting two wars at the same time and still being able to win.
I think it wins for two reasons. One being that the USA has more deployed warheads and two, because the USA is less densely populated than both Russia and China. Both of those countries have a percentage of their people in a very small geographical area, despite the size of their countries. And our food is nowhere near population centers.
Also, nuclear war wouldn’t be as devastating as most people think. We don’t have enough nukes to destroy the world or to even come close to wiping out humanity. It would be hard enough to wipe out a country, let alone the planet.
You aren’t taking into account the environmental impact of using that amount of nukes. If we’re close enough to the tipping point of climate change, the use of that much destructive firepower would tip us over the edge. Also, if a nuclear war were to start, populations would be decimated, and if the fallout was bad enough, humanity could enter a new dark age.
@@Xysterr1
No way, dude.
Shot out of the air? No
Don't ever underestimate Europe's ability to start a world war
SIOP or “psy-opp” 😂
I can assure you that Russian strategic nuclear capability is not something you can over look, Russia also have their own advatages and disadvantages, China might still have struggle to build their own nuclear doctorine capability but they can overcome it in decade, but like you said nuclear exchanges is basically a Mutual Assured Destructions. So it will be the least decision or so a desperate action to bring your enemy down with you and World apocalypse is inevetable at that point. Also if NATO + US exchanges with Russia position, it will come into the same situation and struggles, war in Ukraine is not simply Ukraine VS Russia but NATO + US + Japan + South Korea and Ukraine as proxy VS Russia and a little help from North Korea.
Good reaction as always Luke, can't wait for more videos from you. Have a nice day mate
But in this video they didn’t talk about several important points.
1. Russia (unlike the United States) has in its arsenal the S-400 Triumph, S-500 Prometheus and other anti-missile systems.
2. All missile defense available to the United States is concentrated in the north - only through the North Pole has the United States always expected missiles from Russia. The Sarmat (Russia's most powerful missile) today can attack from anywhere on the globe.
3. Russia has a "Perimeter" system. The US and NATO call this system “Dead Hand”. If anyone is interested, I can tell you in general terms.
4. Russia has over-the-horizon radars for warning of nuclear missile launches.
5. Nuclear topedo "Poseidon". Launched from a submarine. Cruising range (at a depth of up to 1000 meters) up to 3000 miles. When moving, it uses GPS and GLONASS (Russian analogue of GPS). Having reached its destination, the torpedo “lies” on the bottom (for example, near the US coast) and awaits the command to explode. When released, it raises a tsunami up to 500 meters high. What seaside town will survive after such a washout?
How many of these “Poseidons” are ALREADY “sleeping” near the shores of the USA and Europe - only the Russian Ministry of Defense knows.
There are a few more points, but that's enough for now...
Part 2 please
You’re nuts thinking a MMIII is getting shot down. LOL
They didn't even mention the third strategic heavy bomber, the B1B Lancer. There are 100 of those too.
Think the various SALT treaties had them removed from their strategic role. That said.. not sure how difficult it would be to add them back ;-)
They have decoy icbms expecting targeting them
You aren’t an outsider. You are one of us now. Family. 🇺🇸
Just imagine what a nuclear war would be like.. scary
They made a part 2.
Isreal and Germany have this defensive system that could stop nukes
Yeah, you're right. No one wins a nuclear war we all lose. Thank you
Yea, what we know is about 30%.
Sequel please!
We can only speculate, but there's good reason to believe that Russia's nuclear arsenal is in disrepair. There's been a brain drain in Russia for decades, made worse now by their invasion. They can barely maintain tanks and armored vehicles, and their ships and aircraft are seeing a lot of mechanical failures. Maintaining a nuclear arsenal is more complex than any of these.
Actually, according to the Bible, it starts in the Euphrates River area.
All you ave to do is look at their khinzal "hypersonic" missile.
I am waiting on this ufo video bro let's get it💪👊💯
A base with nukes on it is most likely impenetrable
nahh. when an ICBM gets out of the silo its already too late. shoothing it down would require hitting it before it launched or nuking the air / space on its trajectory it just travels too fast
This is old news .. The first missiles mentioned are armed with multiple independent warheads per missile . The number of warheads is technically classified but what is unclassified is 3 to 6 per missile.
I beleive they are "capable" of multiple warheads. But the various strategic arms reduction treaties (SALT) with the Soviets / Russians saw a lot of limititations put in place in order to reduce the overall warhead count. (Also.. clearly a cost savings). I "think" the video is correct in that they are currently only armed with one warhead each. Unless we are "cheating" ;-) Dont think Russian inspectors have been invited for a while..
It is why I like folks you, and your compatriot Ryan Forrester, videos. Right now here, we're too much USA, which I like to agree, how screwed up politics here, not funny... At least you lived here. Getting off track, because you understand military, your analysis is helpful for us non-militants. Perhaps the creepiest to video to watch, nuclear war, I really hope we do NOT GO THERE! At the same if it happens, nothing to stop it, thus be smart and vote for individuals representing our state or simply represent us, otherwise well this video is showing how bad it will get. AGAIN, LET'S NOT GO THERE! *shivering*
Living in New England 🔥
Security is higher at any base outside of the USA, to include our protectorates. Our allies are partners, not family like my bothers and sisters at arms.
No country or group of countries has enough warheads to be successful vs the US. If you consider most US targets are hardened & even some are moving, you begin to realize how many multiple warheads would be needed to render that target destroyed. Then you start to contemplate how these warheads would be delivered, and how many of those would actually survive to make it to their targets, knowing that the overwhelming majority are bombs, short-ranged missiles and artillery shells, medium-ranged air delivery munitions, medium-ranged sea-based missiles is when it hits you, these munitions will never see their target, either b/c their delivery vehicles will be destroyed in the first 15mins or b/c they rely on getting close to their target which would never happen. Bombers would be seen and shot down, ships would be seen and sunk, subs as well, and defensive systems would take out many of the less than 700 active & armed missiles the world has at the ready. Then you think about the US response. The US would have many if not all of its sub-based weapons intact & able to be launched, and many of its bomber-based systems would also survive, just needing to marry the weapons to where the surviving planes are, and many of its ICBMs would also survive and the reloads would just need to be delivered to the surviving silos. On top of these threats would still be a standing military capable of destroying multiple nations with conventional weapons. You will then understand no nation has the ability to use nukes in a successful manner and the reasoning for countries to continue to invest in these expensive weapons is to give them comfort that the US will not nuke them in fear of some weapons getting to their targets and those targets being high civilian population centers so as to hit hard in their dying breaths & make the US regret it.
So in conclusion, if you don't kill the US military, it will kill you in response. If you don't kill the US population, they will build the things needed to kill you and then create the forces necessary to go kill you. The weapons needed to kill the military and the population so as to keep the US from going and killing you, is more than the world without the US, has...and you got to know the US will have some allies no matter what, so you will need to include them as well in the things that need to be killed or they will come kill you.
React to the 2nd one, it's also a great video.
Not really something worth making a reaction video for, but I wanna recommend a video by GDF called 'There Was No "Cold" War.' It's a good watch for contextualising the effect that nukes have had on the world. One of the standouts being that, during the three years of the Korean, more tonnage of bombs were dropped on the peninsula than every bomb that was dropped on Japan, including the two nukes, about equivalent to the tonnage of bombs dropped over the three years of the Pacific War in WW2.
Yeah but nuclear bombs have radiation that’s the big thing about nukes the long term affects