Peacekeeper missile

Peacekeeper-missile-testing.jpg (761 KB)

  • Leave a comment ?

    36 Responses to Peacekeeper missile

    1. looks nice if they weren’t firing from/targeting to the sea.

      Reply

    2. I love the names these things get. If I were ever a weapons manufacturer, I would have the best names for my armament.
      ~
      “It’s For Your Own Good” carpet bombs
      ~
      “Hug from God” landmines
      ~
      “Melt Away Your Sorrows” flamethrowers

      Reply

    3. I had to look this up 🙂 apparently each one of those lines represents (if loaded with nuclear warheads) 20 times the Hiroshima bomb “Little Boy”. Strangely reminds me of the ironman movie.

      Reply

    4. @Mootea: if so then it shouldn’t be called peacekeeper missile but more like economic crisis missile

      Reply

    5. Pew Pew Pew Pew Pew Pew Pew Pew

      According to Wiki. The missile is no longer in service.

      Reply

    6. @Paul_Is_Drunk: Nuclear weapons have kept the peace, to a certain extent. Notice we haven’t had a World War in 60 years? Do you think that’s because the UN has done such a good job?

      Reply

    7. @reboot: We haven’t had a World War in 60 years? Holy crap! :O

      C’mon, man. Give me some credit. I was booted from my high school history class back in the day for advocating that exact position.

      “Peacekeeper” is still a silly name that is used for too many weapons. Lighten up.

      Reply

    8. @Puulaahi: Does that mean I can pick some up at a discount?

      Reply

    9. I worked for Martin Maretta and worked on this program. It was originally called PeaceMaker but Ronald Reagan mixed it up and called it PeaceKeeper. I ran Vibrational testing on the Arm/Disarm Switch and the guidance truss that took the place of one of the re-entry vehicles.

      Reply

    10. @LukeV1-5: Definitely. Probably on sale too at a black market weapons depot near you.

      Reply

    11. I think Peacekeeper stood more for it’s name than it’s purpose. No kind of peace can be obtained by a missile with a 300 kiloton yield.

      Reply

    12. @Tetsuo137: But a baker’s dozen of them obtains peace of the most lasing kind.

      Reply

    13. Lasting. I have to use the virtual keyboard, my one is drying out right now.

      Reply

    14. @Tetsuo137: If you’re nuking someone, then there shouldn’t be a price too high. It should be the very, very last resort.

      Fun factoid. Each one of the nuclear devices is twenty times that of Hiroshima, 300 kilotons. Each Peacekeeper carried ten devices. And there were 50 Peacekeepers.

      So that’s like.

      10,000 times the power of Hiroshima.

      Which is alot.

      Yeah.

      Reply

    15. @LukeV1-5: Who is to say that Little Boy and Fat Man were last resorts?

      Reply

    16. @LukeV1-5: “Should be” but rarely is.

      I hate afterthoughts on MCS, you cannot simply delete your previous statement, write the rest of a thought, and then respost it.

      Reply

    17. @Tetsuo137: Well, yeah. It is a great source of information on trivial things that have no significant enough bearing on my life for me to personally investigate myself.

      @Tetsuo137: They weren’t. But America, it’s crazt, bwah.

      @Tetsuo137: Rarely is?

      Tell me, when was the last time a nuclear bomb was used in conflict?

      Oh, yes, it was the same time as the first.

      Reply

    18. Then again, having thought about it

      If they hadn’t retaliated against Japan, they probably would have endured more pan-Pacific attacks.

      They couldn’t use their navy efficiently, Japan having taken out Pearl Harbor.

      And they couldn’t make a land war in Japan, even if they wanted to, because A) most of their useable troops were in Europe, and B) if they pulled some dudes back and committed them against Japan, they’d be fighting a war on two fronts.

      I knew a guy who tried to do that once. Good old Adolf, I wonder what happened to him.

      Reply

    19. ……..

      So really, there was nothing else they could have done.

      Reply

    20. @LukeV1-5: yes, drop twinkies and diet coke on the japanese.

      Reply

    21. @Tetsuo137
      ….Damn. We used to be so tight, back in our Axis days. Oh, the fun we had.

      Anyway, the point I am making. You are picking up what I’m putting down.

      Hitler lost the war.

      Reply

    22. @LukeV1-5: The saying does go, “All’s fair in love and war”. Let us first agree that war, however inevitable it is, is undesirable. Having said that, in war a fair move is a surprise attack, almost like playing chess. If you are thinking three moves ahead, then you want to remove any defense forces so that later on you can better carry out your conquest elsewhere without fear of intervention. The Japanese used no nukes, only the strength of their men and machines. They didn’t want to invade the United States, they only sought to demoralize and cripple their navy. Even at that, the majority of people killed at Pearl Harbour were most likely soldiers? They had signed up anyway and knew the risks and consequences. The attack on Hiroshima and Nagaski was not, IMO, a fair move in that, the US did not seek to remove defenses, or target a military organization before staging an attack using conventional means, what they did was knock the chessboard to the floor.

      How many *military* forces suffered in Pearl Harbour compared to the amount of *civilians* that were obliterated on account of a decision their government made?

      Reply

    23. @LukeV1-5: He did!? I have to check my history books again.

      Reply

    24. Why were Japan seeking to cripple America’s navy, then? For the craic? Bit o’ bant, Sunday night, right lads, let’s initiate a surprise bombing run on that naval base over there.

      No.

      Japan wanted to invade British and Dutch colonies, in order to take their stuff. And they didn’t want America running protection.

      War is nothing like a chessboard. In chess, you make your move, you sit, you wait, you make your move, then the other person makes theirs. In war, you’re making your move while the other person is making theirs, but they could secretly have a second queen waiting in the wings, or a king that explodes violently when placed in checkmate, or a piece I will call a Deacon which can move to any square on the board and has the power to render all your rooks powerless. In war, you can’t see their side of the board. In chess, you can see how their pieces are folding out. In chess, you watch their pieces moving around, and you develop a strategy. In war, you see things happen spontaneously, and you try as hard as you can just to make more of the other bastards die than your own.

      I fucking hate the chess-war analogy.

      Reply

    25. @LukeV1-5: When you compare them in strategy they are very similar. There is always a strategy in chess and in war. And whats more you hate the chess-war analogy? I think I’m going to nuke your fucking country.

      Reply

    26. @LukeV1-5: That should have been, “I think I’m going to nuke your country, tabarnak!” Carries more weight that way. Feels more satisfactory to say as well!

      Reply

    27. @the_duck: I’d say it was better than first time aroud. I got waaaaay more comment than your silly pic.

      @Tetsuo137: I’m w/ Luke on this one War does not play out like a chess game. Have you ever played Diplomacy? If not, check it out.
      My whole family played this game (when we were board w/ card games).

      Reply

    28. @Tetsuo137: Businesses have strategies. Are businesses war?

      Computer programming has strategy patterns. Are these war-like patterns?

      Poker has strategies. Yeah, I once nuked someone while playing poker. It’s quite a common occurrence, poker-related combat.

      Hell, when I go places, I have a strategy. Get up > Get Dressed > Eat > Leave House > Go To Place.

      It’s a good strategy, I have yet to lose the war against My Leaving The House.

      Reply

    29. OK, OK, OK…my first base was F.E. Warren Air Force Base, Wyoming. It’s a missle base meaning that it was our collective mission to maintain the ICBMs…

      Back in 2005, an order from Space Command had the Peacekeepers deactivated (though not the warheads, which are being placed in the Minutemen missles). It was a big ceremony, and I got a huge ass coin with a pic of the Peacekeeper on it…

      Reply

    Leave a Comment




    Advertisements Alcohol Animated Images Art Awesome Things Batman Cars Comic Books Computers Cosplay Cute As Hell Animals Dark Humor Donald Trump Fantasy - Science Fiction Fashion Food Forum Fodder Gaming Humor Interesting LOLcats Military Movie Posters Movies Music Nature NeSFW Politics Religion Sad :( Science! Sexy Space Sports Star Trek Star Wars Technology Television Vertical Wallpaper Visual Tricks Wallpaper Weapons Women WTF X-Mas