Shoddy weapons of Russia in Ukraine invasion versus superiority of weapons by West-- may presage Russia's nuclear is also shoddy?//SCIENCE COUNCIL RULES EARTH

News tonight that President Biden is giving Ukraine missiles that can take on the barrage of Russian missiles fired on Ukraine. Only they have short range distance only, and not able to strike into Russia.

But some time down the line, Ukraine is going to need missiles that actually bomb Russian cities such as Moscow and Stalingrad. For that is the only way to make Russia stop bombing Ukraine. No country has the right to bomb another country any time it choses to bomb. So the only way to stop Russian bombing is either Putin is deposed, or Ukraine starts bombing Moscow and Stalingrad.

So it probably is wise to make gradual this final concession of giving Ukraine missiles that reach Moscow. Doing it gradually, in hopes that Putin is deposed soon and no need for missiles for the Ukraine onslaught will stop.

But in observation of this invasion of Ukraine, every time weapons are given to Ukraine, they have been far superior than anything Russia has. And here the question has to be asked, both Russia and NATO have about 6,000 nuclear missiles.

Can we safely say that the superiority of the West missiles of nuclear missiles, that all 6,000 are 100% well performing, but that if Russia launches its 6,000 missiles, considering how shoddy is all their prior war weapons, that only 3,000 of those 6,000 will do what they were built for. That their weapons shoddy of make and design, that 50% are dudes.

Can we make that appraisal??? A state-government built weapons are only 50% useable and 50% dudes. Whereas in the West, we have private manufactures with far closer eyes on detail and performance and which are electronically built.

Is anyone doing a research assessment of the failure rate of the weapons of war that Russia is using in Ukraine? And then we can project that failure rate on the Russia's 6,000 nuclear missiles.

We see a failure in the battleship Muscva, gunned down by a electronic hand held missile.

I should include this in my 180th book.

180th published book

The Calculus of Nuclear War// Political science
by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) Format: Kindle Edition

Preface: Slowly it seems that I was made consciously aware that this Russia's Putin invasion of Ukraine could mean the death of not just thousands of people but even billions of people in a nuclear war. And then I realized that Putin's Russia could be the deciding factor in the extinction and into oblivion of all of life on Earth, not from the nuclear war itself, but because we need this precious time to colonize Europa, the satellite of Jupiter. Since our Sun has gone Red Giant Phase, having killed 25% of all insects from 2010 to 2020, with its NASA report of the Sun increasing yearly solar radiation of 0.005% yearly. This is also the likely cause of death of 30% of North American birds. And the accelerated polar ice mass melting. So instead of have a nuclear war and clean up afterwards. We should devote the next 1,000 years to colonizing Europa. Not be chasing the pipe-dreams of petty dictators of Russia and China.

In other words, we have perhaps 1,000 years to colonize Europa as Earth's second home. And a nuclear war on Earth in 2022, probably preempts that colonization. And so, faced with a Sun gone Red Giant Phase, we cannot afford a nuclear war and its clean-up.

So, well, Putin's Russia invasion not only threatens Ukraine, but the entire life on Earth. Never before in human history has one man with a crazy insane mind, threatened so much.

So I want to discuss and talk about the calculus of a nuclear war, in hopes that talking about it, gets others to be consciously aware of the horror and scope of terror and perhaps behave and do things to avert or stop a nuclear war.

Cover Picture: Is my iphone photograph of a Google Search on "countries nuclear weapons". Russia has the most at nearly 6,000 and NATO has almost as many, but slightly less than 6,000. But the NATO arsenal is better made, designed and electronically engineered. Of course many of those missiles are in quiet submarines.

Stick to mathematical and physics crackpottery - it is much better than your political crackpottery. LULZ!

On Wednesday, June 1, 2022 at 1:49:23 AM UTC-4, Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> Shoddy weapons of Russia in Ukraine invasion versus superiority of weapons by West-- may presage Russia's nuclear is also shoddy?//SCIENCE COUNCIL RULES EARTH
>
> News tonight that President Biden is giving Ukraine missiles that can take on the barrage of Russian missiles fired on Ukraine. Only they have short range distance only, and not able to strike into Russia.
>
> But some time down the line, Ukraine is going to need missiles that actually bomb Russian cities such as Moscow and Stalingrad. For that is the only way to make Russia stop bombing Ukraine. No country has the right to bomb another country any time it choses to bomb. So the only way to stop Russian bombing is either Putin is deposed, or Ukraine starts bombing Moscow and Stalingrad.
>
> So it probably is wise to make gradual this final concession of giving Ukraine missiles that reach Moscow. Doing it gradually, in hopes that Putin is deposed soon and no need for missiles for the Ukraine onslaught will stop..
>
> But in observation of this invasion of Ukraine, every time weapons are given to Ukraine, they have been far superior than anything Russia has. And here the question has to be asked, both Russia and NATO have about 6,000 nuclear missiles.
>
> Can we safely say that the superiority of the West missiles of nuclear missiles, that all 6,000 are 100% well performing, but that if Russia launches its 6,000 missiles, considering how shoddy is all their prior war weapons, that only 3,000 of those 6,000 will do what they were built for. That their weapons shoddy of make and design, that 50% are dudes.
>
> Can we make that appraisal??? A state-government built weapons are only 50% useable and 50% dudes. Whereas in the West, we have private manufactures with far closer eyes on detail and performance and which are electronically built.
>
> Is anyone doing a research assessment of the failure rate of the weapons of war that Russia is using in Ukraine? And then we can project that failure rate on the Russia's 6,000 nuclear missiles.
>
> We see a failure in the battleship Muscva, gunned down by a electronic hand held missile.
>
> I should include this in my 180th book.
>
> 180th published book
>
> The Calculus of Nuclear War// Political science
> by Archimedes Plutonium (Author) Format: Kindle Edition
>
> Preface: Slowly it seems that I was made consciously aware that this Russia's Putin invasion of Ukraine could mean the death of not just thousands of people but even billions of people in a nuclear war. And then I realized that Putin's Russia could be the deciding factor in the extinction and into oblivion of all of life on Earth, not from the nuclear war itself, but because we need this precious time to colonize Europa, the satellite of Jupiter. Since our Sun has gone Red Giant Phase, having killed 25% of all insects from 2010 to 2020, with its NASA report of the Sun increasing yearly solar radiation of 0.005% yearly. This is also the likely cause of death of 30% of North American birds. And the accelerated polar ice mass melting. So instead of have a nuclear war and clean up afterwards. We should devote the next 1,000 years to colonizing Europa. Not be chasing the pipe-dreams of petty dictators of Russia and China.
>
> In other words, we have perhaps 1,000 years to colonize Europa as Earth's second home. And a nuclear war on Earth in 2022, probably preempts that colonization. And so, faced with a Sun gone Red Giant Phase, we cannot afford a nuclear war and its clean-up.
>
> So, well, Putin's Russia invasion not only threatens Ukraine, but the entire life on Earth. Never before in human history has one man with a crazy insane mind, threatened so much.
>
> So I want to discuss and talk about the calculus of a nuclear war, in hopes that talking about it, gets others to be consciously aware of the horror and scope of terror and perhaps behave and do things to avert or stop a nuclear war.
>
> Cover Picture: Is my iphone photograph of a Google Search on "countries nuclear weapons". Russia has the most at nearly 6,000 and NATO has almost as many, but slightly less than 6,000. But the NATO arsenal is better made, designed and electronically engineered. Of course many of those missiles are in quiet submarines.