It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

DEVELOPING: Trump Considers Sending B-52 Nuclear Bombers to Korean Peninsula

page: 3
11
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 9 2017 @ 10:54 PM
link   
a reply to: FredT

The B-52 might find itself out of the nuclear mission soon. They're planning a SLEP for the -86s, but they're at the end of their shelf life in a couple more years. They removed the AGM-129s because of the issues they had. I haven't heard if the SLEP was actually done or not, but if not, there isn't an ALCM for them to carry, so no more nuclear mission.




posted on Mar, 9 2017 @ 10:57 PM
link   
a reply to: randomthoughts12

No we would not. Nor would there be all this fear and chaos.



posted on Mar, 9 2017 @ 11:34 PM
link   
Him putting $50+ billion extra into our military makes sense now. The MIC wants another war and Trump is happy to oblige.



posted on Mar, 9 2017 @ 11:36 PM
link   
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

The MiC is making huge profits over the fact that the current leadership has run the military into the ground over the last 16 years. Between maintenance and replacements, right now, if there was a war, we'd be hurting pretty badly.



posted on Mar, 9 2017 @ 11:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

The MiC is making huge profits over the fact that the current leadership has run the military into the ground over the last 16 years. Between maintenance and replacements, right now, if there was a war, we'd be hurting pretty badly.

Do you have any examples of how the military has been run down?
You'd think with the budget they have been getting they'd be in good shape?
I do believe you are correct, i'd just like to be able to point out specific examples to people who claim it is not run down.
edit on 9-3-2017 by D8Tee because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 9 2017 @ 11:37 PM
link   
I would question the need to send B52's any where near the Korean Peninsula. Guam, or even Japan, is more than close enough for an aircraft with transoceanic range, not to mention midair refueling...

Smacks of saber rattling. Which is not unheard of where North Korea is concerned.



posted on Mar, 9 2017 @ 11:41 PM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

$600 billion per year, that's billion with a B. How is our military run down? It's by far the strongest in the world and still would be even if we cut that budget in half.

Our military is NOT hurting, but I'm sure the MIC wants people to think so because... more money.
edit on 3/9/2017 by 3NL1GHT3N3D1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 10 2017 @ 12:06 AM
link   
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

The budget is $600B a year. That covers base maintenance, pay, overseas operations, R&D, procurement, fuel budget, and a lot more. By the time you break it all down, it's stretching a long way.

You should try looking beyond the budget. Of our 10 carriers, two are deployed, two or three more are in workups, the rest are in for maintenance that is going beyond what was originally scheduled. And that's just the carriers. The rest of the surface fleet is just as bad when it comes to maintenance.

Our primary bomber is the B-52. The youngest aircraft is over 60 years old. The average age of our entire Air Force is almost 40 years old. Our two primary fighters are the F-15 and F-16. One is pushing 30, the other 25. That's average age of the fleet, not the design itself. The F-15 has structural problems that have G limited a number of them. The F-16 went through a period where 1/4th of them were grounded for cracks.

The E-3, E-8, and KC-135s are looking at retiring the oldest examples so they can put parts that are no longer available into the supply chain for the others.

The Navy, including the Marines, currently have 2/3rds of their F-18 fleet grounded because they're as much as 5 years behind on scheduled Depot maintenance.

The result of all this is less flying time for some pilots, resulting in more accidents. The Marines lost something like 9 F-18s, 1 AV-8B, 1 MV-22, and 2 CH-53s last year largely because of readiness problems.

But I'm sure you'll just say that's MIC propaganda to get more money. The simple reality is that you can't push a force at the operations tempo we've been running for 16 years. It eventually catches up to you and bites you in the ass. We've reached that point.



posted on Mar, 10 2017 @ 12:10 AM
link   
a reply to: D8Tee

Oh God, if Trump drop a nuclear bomb in Pyongyang, America will become an international pariah overnight.
edit on 3/10/2017 by starwarsisreal because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 10 2017 @ 12:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: starwarsisreal
a reply to: D8Tee

Oh God, if Trump drop and nuclear bomb in Pyongyang, America will become an international pariah overnight.


There's no need. We learned this week that the CIA can manipulate vehicles. President Trump should (kindly) ask the CIA to turn one of the parade tanks into Kim Jung Un's viewing stand. Or, to be certain of the kill, blast the viewing stand with a shell. Save thousands, or millions of lives that way.



posted on Mar, 10 2017 @ 12:23 AM
link   
a reply to: Zaphod58

If Trump starts a war with North Korea then he is only exasperating the problem, no? Why try to pick fights when you're still bloodied and bruised from the last fight which hasn't even ended yet?

While we worry about NK "possibly" building ICBM's we are spending over $8 billion on a single nuclear bomb only for it to be dropped somewhere in a desert in Nevada. Total waste of money in my opinion, but warmongers gonna warmonger I guess.



posted on Mar, 10 2017 @ 12:26 AM
link   
a reply to: reldra

You're predictable.

Go look at the number of bombs dropped under Obamas regime.



posted on Mar, 10 2017 @ 12:26 AM
link   
a reply to: carewemust

That would have cause the North Korean military leadership to launch nuclear attacks against South Korea, Japan, and possibly the US via disguised cargo ships.
edit on 3/10/2017 by starwarsisreal because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 10 2017 @ 12:28 AM
link   
a reply to: carewemust

If a North Korean said the same about Trump you wouldn't be too happy, especially seeing as how innocent civilians would be in the blast radius of that shell. But hey, who cares about people halfway across the world? May as well not even see them as people, just target practice.



posted on Mar, 10 2017 @ 12:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: carewemust

If a North Korean said the same about Trump you wouldn't be too happy, especially seeing as how innocent civilians would be in the blast radius of that shell. But hey, who cares about people halfway across the world? May as well not even see them as people, just target practice.

Hahaa, are you aware of some of the things that N. Korea says about the USA?
Who cares, it's just rhetoric from a leader desperately clinging to power at the expense of his own people.



posted on Mar, 10 2017 @ 12:42 AM
link   
a reply to: D8Tee

Are you aware of some of the things that people in this thread have said about North Korea? Literally begging for us o bomb them and go to war with them.

What do you think will happen if we bomb Kim Jong-un and kill innocent people in the process? It's not just going to end there I promise you, yet people are still willing to send our soldiers over there to die. I guarantee you the ones asking for war won't be the ones signing up to fight.



posted on Mar, 10 2017 @ 12:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: D8Tee

Are you aware of some of the things that people in this thread have said about North Korea? Literally begging for us o bomb them and go to war with them.

What do you think will happen if we bomb Kim Jong-un and kill innocent people in the process? It's not just going to end there I promise you, yet people are still willing to send our soldiers over there to die. I guarantee you the ones asking for war won't be the ones signing up to fight.

Better to let the hermit kingdom perfect their ICBM and put a nuclear warhead on it?
I have no answers, just watching this unfold.



posted on Mar, 10 2017 @ 12:49 AM
link   
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1

I guess you skipped over the part where B-52s have been on Guam continuously almost 20 years, and have participated in Foal Eagle, which is what these are going to Korea for, almost every year.

They were flying over South Korea under Obama and were largely ignored, with a couple exceptions. Now suddenly they're about to start a war.
edit on 3/10/2017 by Zaphod58 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 10 2017 @ 12:54 AM
link   
a reply to: D8Tee

South korea shud just stop being a bunch of pussies and just talk to the north about stuff start working together lol



posted on Mar, 10 2017 @ 12:55 AM
link   
a reply to: daniel2sxc

Find some common gorund first stop treating em like aliens lol



new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join