I Hope This Guy Is Wrong If He Is Right Lord Help Us All Canadian Prepper

a reply to: Direne

Usually I don't do the Trevor's Axiom thing, but I'm compelled to correct you.

NORAD does not automatically intercept incoming missiles because Canada is not part of the U.S. ballistic missile defense system, didn't you know that?

The North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD) is a United States and Canada bi-national organization charged with the missions of aerospace warning, aerospace control and maritime warning for North America. Aerospace warning includes the detection, validation, and warning of attack against North America whether by aircraft, missiles, or space vehicles, through mutual support arrangements with other commands.

Also our NATO allies. As far as neighbors go that's about as friendly as America can get.

US and Canada are equally protected. The difference between Tyndall and Winnipeg is one is called The CONR and the is called The CANR. And also a third region in Alaska.

All regions have the same or similar assets at their disposal too. Canada NORAD uses F-18's for intercept and the US NORAD uses F-16's. If we have something they don't, we usually sell it to them.

It's pretty equal as far as capability.

To speak to the thread. I have confidence in the protection of the entirety of USA and Canada in the event of WWIII. Even from missiles. Both countries have Aegis SBT protecting them now (since 2021), which is effective against even China's most dastardly hypersonic missile.

I don't think that's Hubris either.

a reply to: Degradation33

Please, reread my statement, and then reread yours. The keyword is intercept. NORAD can indeed warn and detect incoming ballistic missiles. But to intercept them you need to use missiles that Canada lacks.

And US is not allowed to intercept incoming missiles over the skies of Canada.

a reply to: LittleJake

Canadian Prepper makes essentially the same "The Sky is Falling" and "WWIII is about to begin" every week.

Sometimes he reports some factual news, but his analysis is worthless.

originally posted by: Direne
a reply to: Degradation33

Please, reread my statement, and then reread yours. The keyword is intercept. NORAD can indeed warn and detect incoming ballistic missiles. But to intercept them you need to use missiles that Canada lacks.

And US is not allowed to intercept incoming missiles over the skies of Canada.

I did some looking around and found that as of May, 2022, Canada is re-evaluating whether or not to join the United States’ ballistic missile defense system.

Canada taking ‘comprehensive look’ at joining U.S. ballistic missile defense

A more comprehensive look at Canadian air and missile defenses:

Link

I'm guessing that if Russian, Chinese or N Korean missiles are coming over the Arctic, and the US can't knock them out before they are over Canadian airspace, the US just might still attempt to intercept them over Canada, lack of agreement to do so be damned. And even if ICBM were intercepted outside of Canada, the debris might still land there.

a reply to: Direne

And US is not allowed to intercept incoming missiles over the skies of Canada.

BS.
Lots have changed since that was an issue.

The new capabilities of MIRV delivery from the edge of space can target cities in Canada as well as in the US simultaneously. The rules have changed in these scenarios and NORAD has updated weapons and tactics accordingly.

In the US, big changes in bases in Alaska and Norther US states as well, but we, me (US and CA civilians) will never be privy to the specifics of any of it.

a reply to: charlyv

I don't agree, I have a different opinion, I however think that... are all expression you can use instead of BS. Can you try?

I'll be indulgent, though. Now, the new MIRV capabilities are coupled to a new technology: hypersonic missiles. This, together with other technological elements, configure a totally new type of threat that has nothing to do with the old ICBMs. These new technologies do also introduce an asymmetry that puts mutually assured destruction at risk.

Apart from that, the new systems are AI-based, therefore target identification, weapon assignment, and the entire decision support segment have been automated in a way the essentially turns a nuclear war into an algorithmic issue inn which human-based decision reduces to just start the war or refrain from pushing the button.

Long gone are the days when you had at least 30 minutes to try to intercept a ballistic missile. Now you only have 8 minutes to calculate the trajectory of a multi-warhead missile that does not follow a ballistic trajectory. This basically mean the game is truly and end-game. NORAD knows that. Everybody knows that. Next nuclear war will be fought by algorithms. That's the new scenario.

a reply to: Direne

Well, I guess you have it all figured out then.

BTW, have you spent any time in the military?

a reply to: charlyv

Yes. My whole life.

a reply to: Direne

Sounded like you had been in for a while. Hope you are enjoying your career.

I was in 8 years, Navy ASW aircrew 1969-77. Enjoyed it immensely. The cold war was coming to an end and we were lucky to have made it through some dangerous times. I see danger again, but I will not be able to serve again at my age.
Stay safe.

a reply to: charlyv

I was involved in the early NAVELEX, coding segments of the ADP software, and later working for the OSIS baseline subsystems fighting together with the guys from CTEC Corp. to integrate systems for the FOSICs, the Fleet Ocean Surveillance Information Centers at Norfolk. It was the time of PDP 11/70 computers and the old Tektronix 4015 graphics displays. Spent some time at Makalapa and finally ended at the ODIN program (SigInt), the underwater segment of AUTODIN.

Hopefully you won't have to serve again, but that's never up to you.

a reply to: MrInquisitive

I wouldn't say worthless, it is made from more information than the average Joe.

a reply to: anonentity

My point exactly.

Someone made the comment that he is just in the business of selling junk. One YouTuber stated he had been demonetized and in the process stated that it cost around $300 just to produce and edit his videos, much less live and eat. We are all selling junk to make our living. Some sell other junk, but most of us sell our time and labor, "junk". He can't present these videos free gratis.

The variety and scope of information compiled in his videos attracted my attention. He explores geopolitical events leading into, or causing, what is possibly GOING to happen. Not only what IS already happening as a result of, or after the fact.

Considering there was a former NATO official who said there were talks of sending NATO combat troops into Ukraine those are warning signs.

a reply to: Direne

Russia had even stated that they only had used around 10% of their capabilities/strength it would be worrying when Russia starts using it above 10%

a reply to: Direne

It was the time of PDP 11/70 computers and the old Tektronix 4015 graphics displays

We have some common things. Lots of underwater surveillance and certainly DEC. I worked for them in Maynard and Marlboro from 1981 to 90 and 1995 to 98 as a Software engineer PDP-11/70 (RSX,RT-11,RSTS-E and VAX/Alpha VMS/ELN). Then worked for Process Software as SustEngMgr for TCPWare and MultiNet Unix/Linux. Later career all AT&T and General Dynamics. Loved those 11's and Vaxes. They were realtime beasts.

originally posted by: anonentity
a reply to: MrInquisitive

I wouldn't say worthless, it is made from more information than the average Joe.

If his take on just about everything he reports on is that it is a sign that WWIII is about to start or just around the corner, but is proved wrong over and over again, I'd say that is purdee worthless.

Also, regular Joes don't have websites where they sell ridiculously expensive prepper products.

The guy makes the same sorts of claims in every video of his. In one of his most recent videos (hell no I am not going to link to it), the title says "USA Plan To EVACUATE 80000 From TAIWAN", yet wasting time to listen to the video one learns that the US, in fact, is developing contingency plans for evacuating 80,000 US citizens in the event of a war between China and Taiwan, an entirely reasonable thing to do that doesn't mean war is imminent.

The guy is a charlatan, again, unlike most regular Joes.

a reply to: MrInquisitive

What specifically has he reported that has been a falsehood? Forgive me for being persistent but we are already in a true crisis, where the UK Government for one has had to set up a ministry of truth to counter attempts to discredit their own disinformation, About the safe and effective medical intervention. Usually when we go down this path next comes the thuggery to enforce the narrative.

a reply to: charlyv

Maynard? That was DEC's HQ, I recall. I spent some time there learning how to fix some Coral code and recoding into VAX Ada, under VMS, obviously (the only OS I really love, I confess).

originally posted by: anonentity
a reply to: MrInquisitive

What specifically has he reported that has been a falsehood? Forgive me for being persistent but we are already in a true crisis, where the UK Government for one has had to set up a ministry of truth to counter attempts to discredit their own disinformation, About the safe and effective medical intervention. Usually when we go down this path next comes the thuggery to enforce the narrative.

You're going off topic with the John Campbell stuff, so I am not biting on that, except to say the good doctor disseminates some misinformation himself.

But as far as Canadian Grifter goes, as I already stated, a title of one his recent videos is misleading because it says "US plans to evacuate 80,000" as if it is a fate accompli, when in fact it is a developing a contingency plan in case of war between China and Taiwan. Can you acknowledge that "plan to evacuate" is different than "contingency plan to evacuate"?

As I already acknowledge in my first post, he reports factually well enough in his videos from what I've seen of them, but he gins up the titles of his videos and says WWIII is coming very soon on account of the rather prosaic matters that he reports. His analysis is crap, and is just a grift.

a reply to: LittleJake

You are Danish aren't you......?