HABBENING
- Home
- Board: /pol/ - Politically Incorrect
- Reading: HABBENING
>Russia leaks developing "status-6"
>crazy soviet weapon project back from the 1960s
>unmanned self-destructing mini-submarine travelling 1000 m underwater
>aimed to destroy coast infrastructure and population on a massive scale incl. creating massive contamination areas
>operation length - 10 000 km
WW3 when?
https://meduza.io/feature/2015/11/11/strannaya-utechka-o-novom-yadernom-oruzhii-chto-izvestno
http://freebeacon.com/national-security/russia-building-nuclear-armed-drone-submarine/
here is a TV report where this was "leaked", possibly as a warning against US anti-missile shield plan in Europe
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7YuE10rJsl4
>>55456833
>unmanned submarine
so it's a torpedo?
>>55457089
basically, yes, or an underwater drone
as seen on the image, it is carried by a bigger sub
>>55457089
Is a drone a missile?
>>55457158
no because a drone doesn't use rockets to propel itself, if it did it would be
>>55457158
if it was designed to blow itself up it would be
>>55456833
>operation length - 10 000 km
>>55456833
Let it happen.
>>55457210
Fair enough
Call the russians i dont give a fuck
>>55456833
Just like in my japanese games
No offense but you guys seem really insecure about your position in the world.
I am actually very okay with this.
Because it's a weapon that severely harms countries, but does not lead to complete nuclear wasteland.
Protip: This makes it a primarily defensive weapon.
You cannot start a war or annihilation with this, because it can only harm the coast.
But it can make it so expensive for someone else to attack you that it's a fully effective deterrent against invasion, which is what paranoid Russians worry about.
It's a gamechanger in terms of nuclear deterrent - weapons that do not lead to total destruction fulfils the same role as nukes defensively but not offensively. This might be the best thing for peace and disarmament.
>>55457492
fuck off terrorist supporter
Isn't the missile shield a meme anyways? How would it stop a 1000 ICBMs each with 6+ warheads?
>m-muh reagan lasers
>>55456833
>destroy coast infrastructure
From Montana to Russia, please help us, please do it.
>>55457588
it wouldn't
but it would protect against small amount of missiles, i.e. Pakistani nuclear arsenal
>>55457578
That picture is almost as real as this video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mJr7zUXwBx8
>>55456833
Time to dust off Project Pluto.
Wow cool I bet they make a neat little cgi video of it too. You can't even buy shit helicopter carriers, your planes' munitions are off target all over Syria, and your infrastructure, where it exists, is a few decades too slow. Top fucking kek.
>>55457512
>paronoid Russians
Sounds like something that can be easily intercepted
>>55457492
we feel insecure about american military bases and air defence slowly crawling towards our territory.
Such weapon as this 'leaked' one will assure M.A.D., so we just will be happy to know that you guys won't try and do anything stupid.
>>55457838
Absolutely.
Your problem is that you think someone wants to occupy your country.
>"OH MUH NATURAL RESOURCES"
Why fight off 200 million crazed slavs just to run a fortified mining operation which you could anyway get from Africa or China?
These days the most scarce thing in the Western world is skilled, dedicated non-chimp manpower. We literally do not have the manpower to waste occupying Russia. Norway wouldn't take any part of Russia if someone offered it to us.
You're raised with the concept of "land war" and "mother country". The modern generation is fully happy within their borders. 80-90% of the population are perfectly happy with their borders as they are, 10-20% wants to be separatist. When was the last time anyone ever talked about EXPANDING their country? Never. The idea died with the last generation.
Today, Facebook is probably worth more than Slovakia. Internet land, skills and minds is worth more than land.
>>55458191
Ironically, the resources you spend on military is taking away your economic and political power. Maybe that's the intent.
Here's my suggestion: Produce 1 AK47 and 100 bullets for every person in Russia. Spread them out across the country. Keep your nukes. Dismantle the rest of your military and spend the resources on improving your country instead. Every soldier could be a teacher, carpenter or programmer.
>>55458222
noone is saying and thinking Europe can occupy us physically, which tabloid did you get that from?
Fears are, US is creating means to supress any means of mutual destruction and shift balance in its favor.
>>55458222
That is our nature. We have always been betrayed, stabbed in the back by our "brothers" and so on. Everytime when Russia was weak we were betrayed or attacked.
>>55457198
what
what no one is saying is shit like this are already deployed
suitcase nukes too
americans have similar concoctions throughout the world. ICBMs aren't even needed...nor are they the best option.
>>55458486
I see Russians speaking about conventional invasion all the time.
I fully support continued MAD deterrence, and oppose efforts made by the US to make this impossible. I think that goes for most Europeans.
Your media/politicians should do a better job of communicating this - in more friendly terms, like "Hey, buddy, this is what it is like for us" rather than "IF YOU COMPLY WITH THE US WE WILL NUKE YOU FIRST". Friendliness rather than threats. You would get quite a bit of understanding if you just phrase it sympathetically.
>>55458702
yeah I was retarded there, wanted to delete it but I thought that would just make it worse, so I'll just bear the shame
>>55456833
>unmanned self-destructing mini-submarine travelling 1000 m underwater
So, a torpedo?
>>55458657
Well, most of that happened a long time ago, when manpower was cheap and abundant. Today nothing is as expensive as manpower.
>>55458450
>Produce 1 AK47 and 100 bullets for every person in Russia. Spread them out across the country.
I actually chuckled. Trust me, with nukes owned and controlled by our government the whole world is 100x times safer than with AKs owned by our population. Because they'll turn up all over Europe and Asia. Russian mafia will fucking massacre you guys in your own beds. That threat is much more real than nukes.
>>55458222
I wanted to write a long winded post, but it just didn't flow, so instead I'll say this. There is nothing on this planet worth more than land. Nothing is more obviously limited on a shpere.
>>55457741
American history book.
At least, try to make it credible. The USSR made 92 locomotive during the whole war? Germany simply could have produced 40 000 panzers if they hadn't to produce U boats? The oil production of the USSR was not bigger than the one of Texas?
You are joking, right?
http://jalopnik.com/the-flying-crowbar-the-insane-doomsday-weapon-america-1435286216
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Pluto
Americans had something similar.
But far more brutal.
Actually I was wondering why can't we dissolve army, leaving only nuclear weaponry (well, maybe with some small groups just in case something nasty will happen inside our country)? Can someone more competent explain to me why it is not an option?
![russia_wants_war_look_how_closely_they_put_country_to_our_military_bases[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/e8WasTe.jpg "russia wants war look how closely they put country to our military bases[1]")
>ITT: pic related
>>55459025
Good point. Still, some kind of civil defense against invasions could replace a lot of conventional army, if that is a genuine concern.
>>55459187
I'll say this instead: What people value and why they do so changes over time.
Again, if you asked people "What should be the military goals of our nation?" 200 years ago, probably a lot would say "to expand its borders". Today, could you even find one single person? How long would you have to walk around a modern Western city before you found a single person expressing any desire to expand borders?
As manpower is more scarce, spending lives to get physical commodities is a lot worse than trading for them.
What would people even do with a nuked Russia? Look at geographic maps of Norway, Sweden, Finland and Canada - it's 99% uninhabited. We have the land to house a hundred million people in Norway. But the population has flattened out, and people's main goals in life are to live in big cities. We have a cabin in the mountains, and the neighbors have to come together to cut down trees to prevent the cleared land from getting overgrown.
So what would someone do with Russian land which they cannot do with Canadian or Swedish or Finnish land at the moment- and don't?
>>55459410
Zerg rush prevention.
>>55459410
Imagine this scenario:
NATO forces from Estonia-Latvia-Lithuania attack us simultaneously
advance into our territory in a couple of hours
now we have only 3 choices:
commit suicide by nuking our own territory
commit suicide by nuking NATO countries territory
commit suicide by letting them capture our cities and create new puppet state
Now, imagine that it's not NATO, but taliban or ISIS.
>>55458222
>Norway wouldn't take any part of Russia if someone offered it to us.
Oh, you absolutely would. This faggot is SO happy to be in NATO - playing with the big boys! Thankfully we have commies in charge now, so we won't be joining for a while yet, but everyone else is pushing for it.
If America says jump, you jump. If America says buy our blunder of a plane (the F-35), you ask how many. Sweden may be run by traitors and cυcks, but at least we aren't enthusiastically licking the shit off of america's boot, like you guys.
>facebook value
>He really thinks dot com bubble 2.0 values of tech company stock are legit
>>55458814
>Your media/politicians should do a better job of communicating this
they do. it just doesn't get any attention in the meme western media
Yes Russia. Spend money on shit you will never use.
Meanwhile, the government is stealing from the Russian people, while 98% of Russians are living in shit hole commieblocks.
Top kek. Russian's are the ultimate keks.
When will they make the Shagohod.
>>55459859
check this article by Assange on Google
https://wikileaks.org/google-is-not-what-it-seems
If you forget about the money, internet today is more important than nukes in most cases. With nukes you can only threaten to use them. With internet you can execute action and overthrow the regime.
>>55459859
You will never join because you don't have a country anymore.
You're a Niggerstani
>>55456833
Mr. Trump. That wall needs to be underwater as well.
>>55456833
ripip commiefornia, you will not be missed.
>>55460492
Neither will all the spics living in southern commiefornia
JUST DO IT RUSSIA. YESTERDAY YOU SAID TOMORROW, MAKE WW3 COME TRUE
>>55459582
Here's some basic game theory:
A - nobody wants your land
a - someone is secretly after your land
B - you stop caring for your defense
b - you continue caring for your defense
A+B - you don't lose land
A+b - you don't lose land
a+B - you lose land
a+b - you don't lose land
You can only control things on your side - whether you go B or b, and look, you never lose with b, but lose half the time if you go B, assuming you don't know if it's A or a.
>>55457375
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pFptt7Cargc
>>55457674
I doubt Pakistan's missiles would make it 100m past their starting ramp anyway.
>>55457512
I have no idea why you think this would "not lead to annihilation".
First, we are not in the 1960's any more, so MAD is just a fairy tale told to the public so you believe Nukes are an impossibility. Nukes are nowhere near as destructive to the environment as modern society believes, and their use will not "destroy the entire world".
>>55457512
There's one HUGE fucking difference between this and a ballistic missile. With an ICBM, satellites can easily detect whether they've been fired, so there's a strong incentive to not use them.
These things can be launched very quietly, and don't need as much launch infrastructure. They're vastly superior for false flag attacks.
>>55458191
Fucking this.
Amerikeks keep pushing forward their troops and bases here, I've seen an APC roll down a street.
>>55457512
To be honest what week now of the Russian biological program does this alone. Its a very effective MAD.
>>55456833
THERE WERE REPORTS THAT SPECIAL SUBMARINES WERE USED TO HAMMER AN UNDERWATER JAPANESE FAULT LINE AND CAUSE THE TSUNAMI THAT DESTROYED FUKUSHIMA
SUPPOSEDLY THIS WAS BECAUSE OF JAPANESE NATIONALISM AND ISOLATIONISM
>>55460334
>>You're a Niggerstani
>White americans a minority of births since 2011
>A nigger raised by communists terrorists (Bill Ayers and others) has been elected twice in a row
Haha. I do have to say, I admire your persistance in the face of complete and total defeat.
>>55461167
>BECAUSE OF JAPANESE NATIONALISM AND ISOLATIONISM
>Implying it wasn't Israel using nuclear terrorism (that's what they have on the rest of the world) because Japan helped Iran with their nuclear reactors
Look it up.
>>55459410
Because the ability to have an option that isn't nuclear is a good one, like protecting trade routes.
A good part of the russian millitary is a glorified welfare program, no question about it, but that's not unique, and it actually does do things..
>>55461248
Have you heard the 9/11 theory that Israel held DC hostage with a unexploded Nuclear weapon fired into the pentagon? They already performed their Samson option years ago. They used it to hold the world hostage.
>>55460639
What you haven't included in the calculation is the economic consequences of each. More like:
A+B: you don't lose land and you can spend your resources on developing yourself
A+b: you don't lose land and you have to spend massive resources on a military which does nothing
a+B: you still probably don't lose land as long as you have nukes, but can spend elsewhere than the military
a+b: see above
In a country, the military is dead weight. They consume, but they do not produce anything. Imagine if every tank you produced had been a bus or train, and every person working on maintaining tanks in the mlitary instead worked on maintaining buses and trains. That is what you give up.
Defense isn't free - and trying to have big enough conventional forces to challenge both Europe and the US together tears you apart. So you can continue to chug along in the present course and cling onto a basic level of survival, or actually develop your country but that means relying on nukes alone, and systems like the one in this thread.
>>55459859
When I say we wouldn't take Russia if someone offered it to us, that's obviously on our own initiative. If the US went to war with Russia we would go along, but have no interest in it. We would be in it for NATO, not because it's a good idea.
>He really thinks dot com bubble 2.0 values of tech company stock are legit
Yeah no, I am speaking about the cultural and intelligence value of facebook, not the economic value. If a country could choose between having Slovakia and having Facebook, Slovakia would be a black hole in an instant. It's to illustrate that land today has little value.
>>55460952
>I have no idea why you think this would "not lead to annihilation".
>First, we are not in the 1960's any more, so MAD is just a fairy tale told to the public so you believe Nukes are an impossibility. Nukes are nowhere near as destructive to the environment as modern society believes, and their use will not "destroy the entire world".
If the 100 largest cities in the US got nuked, how long do you think it would take to rebuild the country to its current status? Probably several generations.
And you think that this would be considered a fair trade by the US? "A hundred million dead and a country in ruins that will take ten generations to rebuild, BUT AT LEAST WE GOT RUSSIA!!" - top kek, it's not a trade someone would want to make.
And in this sense, MAD is very much real. This gives a new meaning to mad, which is Almost-MAD - you would be set back a couple of generations rather than 10+. That's still too much for the US to consider attacking, but not enough for Russia to value a preemptive strike.
>>55462257
If you pick B, there is a 50% chance you won't have a place to develop yourself in. I think that says enough.
Sure we'd love to join NATO and have US defend us (read own us), while we would spend our money on developing ourselves, but they didn't want us when we asked (and that by the way tells you something), so we have to stick to the game theory.
>>55459980
>98%
feels good to be in two percents
>>55463225
I didn't even know that happened. Sounds politically motivated.
Anyway, in my view Russia's best choice would be the following:
- describe that MAD has kept you safe since the second world war, and is what makes you feel safe today
- support that by saying that even if it looks like no conventional war or invasion is likely at the moment, a military takes several decades to develop, and it is impossible to predict the future, so even if today looks like you don't need it you want to preserve a MAD situation
- and you want to reduce your conventional military and focus resources on social and economic development, so you will have to rely even more on MAD as a policy for the next decades
- you will also particularly work on the safeguards against accidents
- make peace with EU in Ukraine by referring to the historical independence as an incomplete situation in political turmoil, and get them to agree to a division of the country based on people's votes, and offer relocation to Russian or Ukranian dominated areas. Maybe this part is unnecessary and something like it is already happening, but if you want to reduce your conventional military then you need to resolve current conflicts first
Maybe it sounds like I am trying to get you to reduce your conventional military. I would actually like everyone to do so. I have an economics background, so I realize the enormous resources taken up by armies.
>>55463784
It's a shame that you seem to have forgotten one of the fundamental axiom of economics, which is scarcity. That alone should lead anyone to do whatever it takes to protect your own share of resourses.
In my veiw Russia's best choice is to have the best military in the world, which is what our good friends in US are successfully trying to achieve, and for a good reason too.
>>55457741
>>55459276
That post.
See flag.
Jew flag.
The goys aren't even trying anymore.
Yes, yes, jewmerica won WW II.
>>55459980
this.
>>55460220
for a very very short time, possibly. You underestimate how easily the victor will be overthrown. It's only going to get easier as you go.
>>55463225
>If you pick B, there is a 50% chance you won't have a place to develop yourself in. I think that says enough.
>50% chance
>>55463784
>In my veiw Russia's best choice is to have the best military in the world
See:
>So you can continue to chug along in the present course and cling onto a basic level of survival, or actually develop your country but that means relying on nukes alone, and systems like the one in this thread.
I feel sorry for the Russian people, but sure. I just hope that the social unrest that follows won't cause any serious weapons to go off accidentally and spills the mess outside your borders.
>>55458222
Saddam, Gaddafi, Kim Jong-Il, Assad, and all of South America and Sub-Saharan Africa say herro
>>55456833
fucking KEK! I love our TV propagandons and military trolls. Hahahahaha, oh wow.
>>55456833
I think I've heard of this before. Or really the Soviets had something like this.
They had a cargo ship that was loaded with uranium that if the Soviet Union were to fail it was to be blown up, covering the Earth in fallout.
>>55464829
Gadaffi was because of wanting to be friends with muslims.
Assad was because of wanting to be friends with muslims.
Saddam, maybe because of oil. But why not just invade Saudi Arabia instead? Much more oil and smaller military.
>>55457492
>No offense but you guys seem really insecure about your position in the world.
Look who's talking. How about you secure guys dispose of your nuclear weapon stockpiles.
fuggg
>>55456833
>unmanned self-destructing mini-submarine travelling 1000 m underwater
what is a torpedo?
>>55456833
>crazy soviet weapon project back from the 1960s
it's called Hello Darkness My Old Friend
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fl0USo6q1js
>>55456833
Russianbros could probably read this without problems, so do it.
TLDR - swedkeks spotted a drone like this near nordstream
>>55456833
obvious warning:
"if you send explosive drones around North Stream, we also have explosive drones that cause more damage"
>>55465131
fuck, forgot link
http://wyborcza.pl/1,75477,19155401,dron-z-ladunkiem-wybuchowym-przy-gazociagu-nord-stream-szwecja.html
>inb4 wyborcza
US is working on, probably even has finished, a succesor to the Minuteman III missile. That wacky sub is a joke compared to that.
>>55465187
I wish we could stop this whole, muh mil tech race. It's so fucking annoying, fuck this gay earth.
>>55456996
>that coat of arms at the end
This has always triggered my OCD:
Why do Russians mix Monarchical and Marxist imagery together in their emblems? Is irony lost on slavs?
>>55459582
>Norway
>literally dreaming about russian occupation
toppest of c.u.c.k.
>>55456833
>implying it`s not a deliberate leak
Sergey,pls.
>>55456833
>aimed to destroy coast infrastructure and population on a massive scale incl. creating massive contamination areas
That is a guaranteed nuclear response.
Especially from US which holds the first strike capability.
>>55465170
oh shi habbening!
>>55457737
>TRACKING RAINER
what did they mean by this?
>>55465131
>Na razie nie wiadomo, do kogo należy dron
Spooky.
>>55465350
>Why do Russians mix Monarchical and Marxist imagery together in their emblems
Because we are Russians.
>>55460952
The nukes that have been used were low yield, the kind we have at our disposal on Ohio class submarines with Trident II missile systems and mkV reentry vehicles carry a cluster of 14 w88 350kt atomic warheads. A single one of those SLBM could destroy a region.
>>55465411
That's what he was implying, yes.
>>55459980
>>55464455
>said the americans getting ripped off by about everyone in the USA
>>55458450
>the resources you spend on military is taking away your economic and political power
Yes, and creating workplaces, infrastructure etc
>>55459410
You can't really annex anything with missiles.
The only thing that can guarantee sovereignty is a proper army.
Come on, there's no need to use nuclear weaponry on every little occasion.
>>55465467
What exactly makes you think russia doesn't have first strike capabilities?
>>55458222
Your internet requires:
Copper, oil (plastics), gold, silver, tungsten, silicon, uranium (nuclear plants), platinum, titanium, lead, many rare earths i dont remember, etc.
>>55461248
Yea, that's what I read somewhere and it certainly seems within the realm of possibility.
>>55461494
you have more info on this?
>>55466107
But we still gettin paid
>>55456833
SOON (tm)
>>55457280
>not posting POC clown in 2015... I mean COME ON
>>55459359
Bloody hell that is evil.
so it would surface at a port and explode a nuclear bomb?
wouldn't it just be easier to shoot the warhead off from a ways off the coast?
I know nothing about this sort of stuff, but I'd think the closer you get to the coast the easier it would be to be taken out.
>>55456833
>operation length - 10 000 km
fuck
>>55457741
>see jewish flag
>don't even waste my time :)
>>55456833
Good. Hurry up and nuke California already. That place is a shithole.
>>55459410
>Actually I was wondering why can't we dissolve army, leaving only nuclear weaponry (well, maybe with some small groups just in case something nasty will happen inside our country)
That would be ideal, but then we'd just be waiting around for some nut in a 3rd world shit hole to take over his shit country and nuke us.
I really wish I knew what was discussed in these high ranking military/intelligence meetings to see why we are so hell bent on controlling these shit holes. I bet what we are doing would make more sense if we knew
>>55459749
What Russia has been doing lately is completely rational. despite how our media tries to spin it
>>55457130
>it is carried by a bigger sub
>>55456833
Implying that Russia would just "accidentally" release top secret information.
It's a PR stunt dumbshits...
>>55471657
newfag detected
>>55459749
You think NATO wants war with Russia and that can't be further from the truth. The souring of the relations between us is because of the angry ramblings of dead old men. The average American loves Russia. You're like China's Canada that wanted to kill us for the past 70 years. Lol.
You people want to see some truly amazing missile tech, Russia has missiles that can fly faster than their interceptors.
Currently only two countries have them, Russia and India.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UNG86VSld3s
>>55472292
If it wasn't for Russia Americans wouldn't have a space program. Americans wouldn't be half of what we are today militarily.
>>55472373
Brahmos isn't shit, you want to see fast check out our Trident II SLBM
>>55456833
>>55456996
interesting, not unexpected
Russia has far worse they haven't leaked
I'm 99.999% sure Putin is a paid DoD shill at this point.
I'm with Russia.
Glass some coastlines, remove some kebab, get shit done.
fuck I can't remember who I was responding to, but it was something about how the US is basically the defense spending budget of the rest of the western world.The only reason defense budgets of other western countries are so low, is because we foot the brunt of it. I wish we would spend way less desu, kind of forcing the rest to pay the bill. But whatever.
Every western nation has the same international interests as murica basically.
Some Canadian bro of mine tried to refute this recently, so maybe it's just stuck in my head.....
>>55460639
Based anon.
I wish my shit government understood this rather than keep lowing military spending to one of the lowest in the world (as a % of GDP). We already scrapped our aircraft carrier and at this rate we are on the way of giving up our airforce, all the while the USA offered us the lastest block F-16 with AMRAAMS and later senpai Putin offered SU-35, which the country could afford but would rather spend it all on autismbucks for NEETs and money for single mothers shitting nigglets.
This whole anti-military prejudice (constant cuts since the 1980s) is gonna get my country annexed.
>>55462257
>t. the USA has always paid for our defense
>>55472914
You are correct.
>>55473087
except no one wants your land
if chile invaded tomorrow it'd be a upgrade
>>55473558
>implying chile hasn't already invaded with 500k immigrants
Honestly if Russia and the west would just unite into some sort of agreement the world would be solid for another 100 years at least.
Just enough time to let India shake the poo off its boots and be an actual regional counter to china
>>55473212
>mfw the US literally gives autismbux to the rest of the world in exchange for their military
protip the Us doesn't have anywhere near 75% of the NATO population
although there are a few countries that get a pass, because it was part of their post war agreements. Namely germany and Japan
But I seriously wish those 2 counties didn't have any restrictions on their military. Both are solidly pro west at this point.
>>55474464
If you look every war the US has been in since the 1991 Gulf War it's basically been you guys doing everything and the rest of the West tagging along with a couple of squadrons or maybe a division or two.
Same in Bosnia, Serbia, Afghanistan, Libya, etc..
>>55475956
Pic related
it's literally a weapon to surpass metal gear
So an autonomous submersible from the 60's is somehow advanced enough to never get freakin detected after trolling around for 30-40+ years.
So an autonomous submersible from the 60's is somehow able to navigate itself and/or not deteriorate in any way, be it from sea water or age or what have you.
So this board just believes everything it sees, huh?
>>55458191
>Americans
>Not constantly doing stupid things
Pick two
>>55475956
Afghanistan I can understand.
Iraq had no justification whatsoever. Just incompetence on our part. Hell we got nothing out of that. Not even oil like some people claim.
Such is the problem of having one country with that much military power
>>55457512
Nuclear annhialate the entire world, I dont give teo shits
>>55476241
>Britain not waging wars worldwide while they were the superpower
Must feel good being on the other side huh.
>>55476825
The entire Eastern continent could be nuclear bombed into a fucking wasteland, who cares? You know what, lets all nuke ourselves to save each other the trouble lmfao
>>55477035
>this is what ISIS of murica actually believes
>>55477109
ftw
>>55456833
I don't think most people understand the nature of this weapon. It's not meant to directly nuke a target. The Tsar bomb could be carried by a bomber. This sub is far larger. The drone itself seems to be about as big or bigger than a bomber.
This means a weapon that is in the hundreds to potentially thousands of megatons. If you detonate it 1000 meters underwater at the right location it will create massive tsunamis. It might even create it's own weather system with that much evaporation and rain down fallout.
>>55478643
good luck putin!
>>55462257
>but they do not produce anything.
>I don't need an anus because it doesn't produce anything of value
![0,,17968142_303,00[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/m5U72e7.jpg "0 17968142 303,00[1]")
![obama[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/x9WF0Pj.jpg "obama[1]")
![Снимок-экрана-4[1].png](https://i.imgur.com/J9hcDxO.jpg "Снимок-экрана-4[1]")
