As opposed to let’s march a smaller army than the BAOR was, on Ukraine and if Russia doesn’t then surrender, we march it onwards to Moscow and Vladivostok and do the same as Blair did in Iraq, to bring regime change to Russia.
Which leaves the question how do you square all that with your pro China Commy foreign policy stance.
Unless you actually want to see western forces surrendering to a Russian/Chinese/NK/Iranian force in the Eurasian wastelands.
Thats all fine and dandy except when they promise to buy apples then buy them from a different country
Another carryfast facts from the beano comic book you haven’t a clue
I think that Chinese tariffs are the least of our worries if what I’ve just read on a military site is actually true (I have no way that I can be bothered with to verify it)
Copy and paste….
China Just Detonated a Hydrogen Bomb — Without Nuclear Material.
Imagine an explosion 15x longer than TNT, hotter than lava, and no radioactive fallout. That’s exactly what Chinese researchers just tested: a hydrogen-based explosive that burns white-hot at over 1,800°F — powered by magnesium hydride, not uranium or plutonium.
Originally developed for clean fuel cells, this material now unleashes fireballs capable of leveling targets without crossing the nuclear threshold. A 2kg device created a sustained inferno lasting over two seconds — an eternity in explosive terms.
This isn’t sci-fi. It’s real, peer-reviewed, and could reshape warfare as we know it. No mushroom clouds. No treaties broken. Just next-gen firepower that’s making military analysts around the world take notice.
Is this the future of non-nuclear superweapons? Or a Pandora’s box with no going back?
Just what the American dream dropped on Japan, what’s your point
Did you not read it before jumping in?
Looks like a step forward for China. A compact and powerful non-nuclear bomb.
I certainly don’t know, but isn’t it just a another step?
Dropping one of them is easier than dropping a few loads of more conventional weapons, sure but is it any sort of game changer?
What am I missing?
From what moaster said 2 kg atomises anything it hits for quite a large radius
It “atomises” nothing. It melts aluminium and produces a very high blasr effect.
It is a lot of energy in a small package.
I get it is a step forward, but I don’t see any more than that.
One bomb is easier to deliver than many larger ones. What else am I missing?
In reply to the Japanese dream inflicted on the Pacific region and refusal to stop.
Reply with 15 x as many conventional tipped ICBM’s.Just one V2 warhead could do some damage.
Might as well also load a ‘few’ with some drums of antimonic acid.No one is going to be around to nick us for a chem weapons infringement.
Glad you know all about it then concidering you thought it was just another bomb
If it is correct and genuine, it could certainly be a cause for concern.
An unpredictable regime like China having that kind of weapon.
As said, could be used with no nuclear treaties broken, but similar devastation to a nuclear bomb.
Phew!..Franglais sems to have it sussed, so no cause for alarm.
Best inform those ‘Military Experts’ to stand down… nothing to see here after all.
I think you might have made a typo there?
Shouldn’t China be replaced with America?
Oh, and as a hint when someone says they do not see something and asks what they are missing…in a sentence that ends with a question mark (one of these ?) it generally means thay do not “have it sussed”.
He quoted your post to me where you claimed you knew better than me
You used the word “atomised” .
Do any reports use that word? The reports do say the bomb melts aluminium.
He also said that I “have it sussed”… If i did I wouldn’t be asking for someone to tell me what I am missing.
I dont care what some report says physics says you heat anything to 1800 degrees instantly it aint going to stay solid or liquid
OK.
I’ll leave that there.
No…I’ll leave all the agenda laden hate b/s to you.
Oh… thanks for the grammar lesson, but if it comes from a codescending prick, that particular ‘‘hint’’, (and especially in your case,) usually means, it is purely ‘firing for effect’.