So, Putin claims Russia has nuclear technology four years ahead of America

@Xuan12 speshit

@sunsporter1649 At least you're enthusiastic about it. XD

@Xuan12 Speshit is a Russian dialect translation of the real leader of America, which we all know is Rush Limbaugh. You know, that guy in a golf shirt with a talk show down here in Palm Beach who is really running the country, according to cnn.

@sunsporter1649 They put one out every year...

@QuixoticSoul The Clinton Foundation filed papers this week warning that 22 staffers will be laid off on April 15, when the Clinton Global Initiative is formally shut down.

@sunsporter1649 Is there a point here somewhere?

@whowasthatmaskedman I should watch the movie.

@SimplyTracie Only if its a slow day... Its not that great.

@whowasthatmaskedman Thank you for that. I probably won’t watch it.

@sunsporter1649 Ah, so you're the one that's responsible for the Kerch bridge that people claimed couldn't be built 😂

@QuixoticSoul Actually it was that Roebling bridge across the Hudson.

@WindOfAdolf To be fair, any decent payload missile that hits a ship has a fair chance of sinking it. It's like saying you have a gun that shoots bullets that can kill people. It would be a rather poor gun if it couldn't.

@WindOfAdolf Designing a missile with the payload and penetrating power isn't a challenge for a developed nation. China's real weakness (and perhaps Russia's too) has been guiding that missile to a target, in theory. No such weapons have ever been tested under live conditions, likewise the defenses intended to defeat such weapons have also never been tested under live conditions.

But here's what we know and can expect from any such attempt. Launching one weapon at time when you're trying to kill a carrier is pointless. Multiple weapon systems are going to be deployed in tandem in a bid to overwhelm and confuse the defenders. Entire salvos of short and medium range missiles will be launched and approach from at least 2 different vectors, if not more. In addition, it's likely that one or more sorties of aircraft will be used to provide reconnaissance and draw away naval air assets. Submarine strikes would be more difficult to coordinate, since subs typically respond slower to live intel, but not off the table either either.

Now the carrier is unlikely to approach littoral waters close enough for small attack ships to be an issue, and an open engagement between surface ships would be a major risk. Though not impossible, it is unlikely these tactics would be used, at least in the opening moments of a strike.

Now if one decent missile strike gets through, the ship is in extreme danger. And even if the damage doesn't sink the vessel, slowing it or disabling the flight deck are also major problems, not just for the carrier itself, but for any escort it may have. Having to defend a slowed or disabled carrier without air support would prove a challenging task against a determined enemy.

But that aside, as mentioned. The raw physics of it are not difficult to work out. The question comes down to untested weapons against untested defenses. So what's the solution for the attacker? Launch as many as it takes to get through. A numbers game. The Chinese and Russians have never had an issue with throwing larger numbers out either. XD This is why speed and range and key components of US tactical supremacy. Don't get close enough, and if you have to get close, get away fast.

@TheOneyouwerewarnedabout What agreement? Putin has always touted nuclear tech, and Russia has never stopped modernizing its nuclear arsenal.