Anonymous ID: 9ec080 Jan. 16, 2018, 12:24 p.m. No.67398   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>7412 >>7461

>>67271

>>67276

>>67286

>>67290

>"Suddenly, launch warning in Hawaii, but the cancellation came after impact would have happened"

 

I understand that the nukes could be carried on the sub, but you said impact, impact from what? The point being that the sub is too small to support anything other than the smallest portable missile systems. No missiles large enough to carry a nuke. I don't see why a missile alert would occur if there were a submarine just approaching the coast with nukes on board. Are you alleging the alert was cover for taking out this sub because it was known to be carrying nukes? Having trouble seeing the connection between the missile alert and a sub that cannot carry missiles.

Anonymous ID: 9ec080 Jan. 16, 2018, 12:41 p.m. No.67522   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>7573

>>67461

If you want to have an intelligent conversation then why are you denying facts. The sub is too small, it only has six torpedo tubes. There are no small portable self-contained nuclear missile systems that can just be thrown on a sub. Where are you going to put them? No vertical launch tubes, no space for vertical launch tubes. You can't just throw the missiles on the deck because you wouldn't be able to submerge. And even if you were be able to put missiles somewhere the sub has none of the systems to target and fire them. So that leaves you with the torpedo tubes, yes nuclear torpedoes exist, but you can't just throw nuclear torpedoes into tubes designed for traditional torpedoes. So again I ask what "small delivery systems" are you referring to that can be installed on this sub?

Anonymous ID: 9ec080 Jan. 16, 2018, 12:50 p.m. No.67580   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>7591 >>7594

>>67547

>>67558

They are trying hard to dispell all the rumors of health problems by being very careful to include even the embarrassing details. POTUS is very protective of that subject so the fact they left that in is significant.