#tactical weapons of war

[carolinemillerbooks]

New Post has been published on Books by Caroline Miller

New Post has been published on https://www.booksbycarolinemiller.com/musings/feminine-manefesto/

Feminine Manefesto

Checking the headlines, my eyes fell upon an article about President Joe Biden’s delight in ghostbuster burgers. Ghostbusters are toxic towers of meat, cheese, red onion, pickles, and sauce. While some wonder if Biden is too old for a second presidential term, a better question might be, “If he were to win, would his diet kill him before he was sworn in?” Does the First Lady know what her husband packs away for lunch? The last question isn’t frivolous. Historically, women are family caregivers.  Men seem to focus on smashing things, toys, each other, atoms, or entire countries. Their knowledge of diet and health seems minimal.  Tucker Carlson, a commentator on Fox News is a prime example. The closest he comes to ruminating about food is to worry if M&M candies are part of an underground feminist political campaign.    “Régime du corps,” or “regimen of the body,” written in the 13th century is a health manual commissioned by a French Countess for her daughters to use in their households.  It contained instructions on purging bodily fluids, cupping, and bloodletting. The content also included advice about food, prayer, charms, and how to choose a wetnurse.  The book was popular well into the 15th century. More recently, women have attempted to apply their healing skills to politics. In some male-dominated societies, that effort is fraught with danger. Remember, men in Iran flogged a woman to death for wearing her hajib too loose. Afghanistan’s Taliban leaders take a hardline as well. They deny women education and make them prisoners in their homes, barring them from performing even charitable work through NGOs. At the moment, these men prefer to see people starve rather than allow them to accept a sack of flour from a woman’s hands. These men have forgotten how they came into this world—kissing a woman’s vagina as they exited the womb and dragging behind them an umbilical cord engorged with their mother’s digested food, the sustenance that sustained them for 9 months.   Recently, New Zealand’s Prime Minister, Jacinda Arden, surprised the world by announcing she no longer wished to continue as the country’s leader.  “I have given my absolute all to being prime minister but it has also taken a lot out of me.” The cost is understandable. Might Is Right, forms the cornerstone of masculine statesmanship, the opposite of feminine nurture. Arden’s resignation, however, poses an existential question. Does Might is Right advance the species?  The record, so far, is one of perpetual war, shattered societies, unpredictable violence, and an exhausted planet. Some scientists see the futility of of continuing these power struggles. They view our species as the walking dead, unable to accept that Nature has turned its back on us. Others cling to a small hope, though the hands of the Doomsday Clock stand at one minute to midnight.   I see no reason for irrational exuberance.  In our final minute, too many continue to struggle for pyrrhic victories, wondering, for example, if tactical nuclear weapons can deliver a strategic advantage. These people never ask how many Chernobyls the planet can tolerate. Doing so would force them to confront their insanity. Women represent half the human population. Their history is one of healing and giving life to the other half of the population. One would think they had a stake in the fate of their children and their children’s children. Yet, largely, they remain under the thumb of Might Is Right. How to free themselves from that yoke is crucial to saving an inhabitable planet. Nurture must rule.  But how are women to affect that change without invoking fear? A new paradigm must emerge, or an ancient one revived.  The species must come to see the future of war is dead. Our survival depends upon our working together just as it did at the dawn of our time.       

[army-of-idiots]

[divorceblogger]

wheel of time written by nuclear engineer robert jordan is actually about nuclear anxiety and the consequences of the development of new technology aiding and abetting unchecked usage of weapons of mass destruction. in this essay I will -

[dailykugisaki]

Day 172 | id in alt

Being silly.

[historyofguns]

The article "Nazi Germany’s Last-Ditch D-Day Defenses" by Tom Laemlein, published on The Armory Life, explores the strategies employed by German troops to strengthen the Atlantic Wall during World War II. Faced with a shortage of weapons from their own production lines, the Germans repurposed a vast array of captured artillery from their campaigns in Poland, Belgium, France, and Russia. These included older artillery designs, anti-tank guns, and anti-aircraft guns from various annexed and conquered nations such as Czechoslovakia and France. The article highlights specific weaponry used, such as the French “Canon de 155 GPF” and the Soviet 122mm guns, demonstrating how the Germans integrated captured equipment to bolster their defenses. While this resourcefulness showcased the German military's adaptive strategies, it ultimately did not prevent the successful Allied landings in Normandy, which marked the beginning of the end for Nazi Germany in Europe.

[nicklloydnow]

“Months into Russia’s war in Ukraine, the United States had intelligence pointing to “highly sensitive, credible conversations inside the Kremlin” that President Vladimir Putin was seriously considering using nuclear weapons to avoid major battlefield losses, journalist Bob Woodward reported in his new book, “War.”

The U.S. intelligence pointed to a 50% chance that Putin would use tactical nukes if Ukrainian forces surrounded 30,000 Russian troops in the southern city of Kherson, the book says. Just months before, in the far northeast, Ukrainian troops had stunned the Russians by recapturing Kharkiv, Ukraine’s second-largest city, and were pivoting to liberate Kherson, strategically located on the Dnieper River not far from the Black Sea.

National security adviser Jake Sullivan stared “with dread” at the intelligence assessment — described as coming from the best sources and methods — in late September 2022, seven months after Russia’s invasion, the book says. It caused alarm across the Biden administration, moving the chance of Russia using nukes up from 5% to 10% to now 50%.

According to Woodward’s account, President Joe Biden told Sullivan to “get on the line with the Russians. Tell them what we will do in response.”

He said to use language that was threatening but not too strong, the book says. Biden also reached out to Putin directly in a message, warning of the “catastrophic consequences” if Russia used nuclear weapons.

(…)

In another heated conversation laid out in Woodward’s book, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin confronted his Russian counterpart, Sergei Shoigu, in October 2022.

“We know you are contemplating the use of tactical nuclear weapons in Ukraine,” Austin said, according to Woodward. “Any use of nuclear weapons on any scale against anybody would be seen by the United States and the world as a world-changing event. There is no scale of nuclear weapons that we could overlook or that the world could overlook.”

As Shoigu listened, Austin pressed on, noting that the U.S. had not given Ukraine certain weapons and had restricted the use of some of those it had provided. He warned that those constraints would be reconsidered. He also noted that China, India, Turkey and Israel would isolate Russia if it used nuclear weapons.

“I don’t take kindly to being threatened,” Shoigu responded, the book says.

“Mr. Minister,” Austin said. “I am the leader of the most powerful military in the history of the world. I don’t make threats.”

According to a U.S. official, Austin’s Oct. 21, 2022, call to Shoigu was indeed to warn Russia against any use of nuclear weapons. The official said the call was contentious. The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations, confirmed there were intelligence reports at the time that referred to increased indications of Russia’s potential use of nuclear weapons and they triggered growing concerns within the administration. The official said leaders across the government were instructed to call their counterparts to deliver the same message.

U.S. intelligence officials saw China as having the most influence over Russia, and Biden called Chinese President Xi Jinping about the need for deterrence, Woodward wrote.

Xi agreed to warn Putin, according to the book. Biden and Xi met and agreed in November 2022 that “a nuclear war should never be fought” and noted their opposition to the use or threat to deploy nuclear weapons in Ukraine, a White House statement said at the time.

In terms of the war starting at all, the book details Biden’s criticism late last year of President Barack Obama’s handling of Russia seizing Crimea and a section of the Donbas in 2014, at a time when Biden was serving as the Democrat’s vice president.

“They f----- up in 2014,” Woodward wrote that Biden said to a close friend in December, blaming the lack of action for Putin’s aggression in Ukraine. “Barack never took Putin seriously.”

Biden was angry while speaking to the friend and said they “never should have let Putin just walk in there” in 2014 and that the U.S. “did nothing.””

[f4ll3nf34th3r5y5t]

You can't run forever Mr the Missile.

[kultofathena]

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Kult Of Athena | Swords & Armor (@kult_of_athena)

A rare opportunity to get your hands on a Scorpion Knife, Sword at a discounted price! Expect delivery in 6-10 weeks.

Shop our selection here.

Shown in this video:

God of War – Leviathan Axe

Tactical Ginunting with Sheath

Khopesh Sword of Pharaoh with Leather Sheath

[dialogue-queered]

{D-Q Note}: Nato Tactics in Ukraine #8

15 November 2022

Re: Post-Kherson Russian Policy

“CIA Director William Burns met in Turkey on Monday with his Russian counterpart to warn against the use of nuclear weapons, a White House spokesperson said, amid concern that Moscow may set off a “dirty bomb” that would spread radioactive material and blame it on Ukrainian forces.

The meeting in Ankara with Russian foreign-intelligence chief Sergei Naryshkin wasn’t a negotiation over the war in Ukraine, and Burns didn’t plan to discuss a settlement, the spokesperson said on customary condition of anonymity. Burns also planned to raise the cases of American citizens unjustly detained by Russia, the spokesperson said, a reference to WNBA star Brittney Griner and former US Marine Paul Whelan”.

Source:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-11-14/cia-director-meeting-russian-intel-chief-on-nuclear-weapons

[moderatetoaboveaverage]

I'm tired and I don't have good words to type against your support for the continued maintance of the world's nuclear stockpile. However, as for the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, you have been severely misinformed.

There was, at no point, any real considerations among the United States military of a ground invasion of Japan. It was well known that such an invasion would be costly and useless, as the Japanese were already beaten by the time the bombs were dropped.

These are some quotes from high up military officials directly present for the decisions to drop the atomic bombs

“It is my opinion that the use of this barbarous weapon at Hiroshima and Nagasaki was of no material assistance in our war against Japan. The Japanese were already defeated and ready to surrender because of the effective sea blockade and the successful bombing with conventional weapons…"

- Fleet Admiral William D. Leahy, chief of staff to FDR and Harry S Truman.

The Japanese had, in fact, already sued for peace. The atomic bomb played no decisive part, from a purely military point of view, in the defeat of Japan.

-Fleet Admiral Chester W. Nimitz, Chief of Naval Operations, and Commander in Chief for Pacific Ocean Areas.

In 1945 Secretary of War Stimson, visiting my headquarters in Germany, informed me that our government was preparing to drop an atomic bomb on Japan. I was one of those who felt that there were a number of cogent reasons to question the wisdom of such an act. During his recitation of the relevant facts, I had been conscious of a feeling of depression and so I voiced to him my grave misgivings, first on the basis of my belief that Japan was already defeated and that dropping the bomb was completely unnecessary, and secondly, because I thought that our country should avoid shocking world opinion by the use of a weapon whose employment was, I thought, no longer mandatory as a measure to save American lives.

-General Dwight D Eisenhower, Supreme commander of the allied expeditionary forces in Europe during WW2, and later, president of the United States.

None of these men, high up in the military chain of commands, and directly aware of the decisions at play during the dropping of the atomic bombs, would have said these things if there truly was no other choice, or if the alternative was certain to prolong the war.

We dropped those bombs because they were the new toy, and offered a show of force that could threaten Russia, and reneg on our deal with Stalin to give him Japanese territory if they entered the Pacific theater.

And even if all that can be waved away, the post you cite, *admits* that the bombs were not what made that Imperial Japanese surrender!! The military tribunal could not have given a single shit how many civilians we vaporized with our bombs, this is the same military tribunal that had sat watching all the rest of our bombing raids, and did nothing, and had been hoping that the US would be forced into a ground invasion so they could use their civilians to buffer our troops. it was not until the Russians declared war that they surrendered, because to the military, the only thing that could have made them unconditionally surrender was knowing for 100% sure that they were in a position that was militarily and diplomatically unwinnable.

The bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki did nothing except kill 200,000 innocent civilians. They did not die to force the Japanese military into a surrender, they did not die to prevent a ground invasion, they just died, and *everyone* at the reins of US power knew that when they sent the orders to do it.

For further context, and source for much of this information, I recommend this video.

[veiledfox]

} kinda starting to feel the need to sleep

but I don't want to yet

might get back on games for a while

[army-of-idiots]

[futurefatum]

ALERT: NATO WILL GO TO WAR WITH RUSSIA; PUTIN THREATENED (Tone: 150)

Posted September 13th, 2024 by @CanadianPrepper The video delves into alarming developments in global geopolitics, focusing on NATO’s potential direct involvement in the conflict with Russia and predictions of Vladimir Putin’s assassination. It explores how key decisions regarding military escalations, particularly the use of long-range weapons by Ukraine, have already been made behind closed…

[cyallowitz]

How Easy Is It To Use Siege Weapons in Fiction?

Google Image Search I’m had this topic on my list for a long time, but I never really found the time to think about it.  Still haven’t, which I realized could be part of the reason why I never took it off the bench.  I mean, these aren’t the easiest things to put in your story.  That problem stems entirely from what they are. Siege weapons (A.K.A. Siege Engines) are what you think they are. …

[historyofguns]

In his review for The Armory Life, Dr. Will Dabbs evaluates two holsters from 1791 Gunleather: the M1916 G.I. Hip Holster and the M3 Tanker Holster. Both holsters, made from premium American steerhide, are praised for their craftsmanship and durability, surpassing the quality of original G.I. issued gear. Dabbs shares a personal anecdote about his wife's grandfather, a World War II veteran, who fashioned a Plexiglas grip from a German plane and carried his M1911 in a leather M3 Tanker holster throughout the war. Dabbs compares modern Kydex holsters to the more artisanal approach of 1791 Gunleather, underscoring the emotional and historical significance of leather holsters. Both reviewed holsters are designed to fit full-size 5" 1911 pistols and are available for $99.99 each through the Springfield Armory webstore.