Trump allegedly disclosed US submarine secrets to foreign national

[BackAgain]

But Trump is Mr. Wonderful no matter what he does he is equal to Jesus.

You’re a persistent retard, goonTroll.

Is there anything spokennill of Trump that you morons won’t lap up?

 

[badger2]

Christ, MG is right for a change. Trump has and is playing the xian card, due to their cringing avatarism.

 

[Delldude]

You trying to apologize for Clinton's giving away our CEP tech?

 

[Moonglow]

You’re a persistent retard, goonTroll.

Is there anything spokennill of Trump that you morons won’t lap up?

Is there no fluid from Trump you sycophants won't lap up eagerly?

 

[Moonglow]

You trying to apologize for Clinton's giving away our CEP tech?

Did he really give away our compression sportswear?

 

[BackAgain]

Is there no fluid from Trump you sycophants won't lap up eagerly?

So. You choose to deflect rather than just admit that a gullible chimp like you does willingly lap up all scraps of anti-Trump claims.

You’re a really obvious and odious troll. But you still suck at logic and reality.

 

[badbob85037]

This ought to get interesting...

Former US president Donald Trump allegedly disclosed classified information on US submarines to Australian packaging mogul Anthony Pratt in April 2021, according to a report published by America’s ABC News.

It’s alleged that Pratt relayed the information to “scores of others” including “more than a dozen foreign officials, several of his own employees, and a handful of journalists”, ABC News reported.

“Pratt told Trump he believed Australia should start buying its submarines from the United States, to which an excited Trump – “leaning” toward Pratt as if to be discreet – then told Pratt two pieces of information about US submarines: the supposed exact number of nuclear warheads they routinely carry, and exactly how close they supposedly can get to a Russian submarine without being detected,” sources told ABC US.

‘It’s on Wikipedia’: Debate flares over Trump’s submarine disclosures to Anthony Pratt

Joe Hockey, who served as Australia’s ambassador to the US while Trump was in office, downplayed the seriousness of the alleged disclosures.

www.smh.com.au

And obama gave Russia the size and capabilities of England's atomic submarine fleet. Were the same sources to play?

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

And obama gave Russia the size and capabilities of England's atomic submarine fleet. Were the same sources to play?

Atomic?

 

[Mushroom]

How many nukes boomers carry is not a secret

"Technically", it is. As is a great deal about our submarines including how fast they can move and how deep they can go.

But some damned accurate information is readily available, especially as there are photos of our submarines that show things like the missile hatches open on the topside. All one has to do is count the number of hatches, even though the Navy will never outright say how many it can carry.

Now the US still insists that is a secret, but the Ohio class has been in service now for 42 years. So as far as being "secret", it is one of those that is not really secret, it just falls in the range of information that the Navy will never "Confirm nor deny".

And absolutely nothing appears to be really anything "new" or "interesting". Hell, most of it seems like it could have come from a Tom Clancy novel from decades ago.

This seems like nothing but yet another one of the endless "Orange Man Bad" posts that keep popping up in here.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

"Technically", it is. As is a great deal about our submarines including how fast they can move and how deep they can go.

But some damned accurate information is readily available, especially as there are photos of our submarines that show things like the missile hatches open on the topside. All one has to do is count the number of hatches, even though the Navy will never outright say how many it can carry.

Now the US still insists that is a secret, but the Ohio class has been in service now for 42 years. So as far as being "secret", it is one of those that is not really secret, it just falls in the range of information that the Navy will never "Confirm nor deny".

And absolutely nothing appears to be really anything "new" or "interesting". Hell, most of it seems like it could have come from a Tom Clancy novel from decades ago.

This seems like nothing but yet another one of the endless "Orange Man Bad" posts that keep popping up in here.

I say again for those who will listen: Missiles does not equal warheads. Submarine launched ballistic missiles carry multiple independently targeted reentry vehicles.

 

[Mushroom]

You trying to apologize for Clinton's giving away our CEP tech?

Uh, what?

First of all, it helps when you actually know what you are talking about. I doubt you even understand CEP, as what President Clinton authorized to be sold to China had nothing to do with CEP.

Now for those that do not know, CEP is "Circular Error of Probability". And while it is not exactly, in general that can be seen as the "accuracy" of a missile. In essence missiles will have a CEP, generally expressed in meters. And when a missile detonates, it will be somewhere inside of that circle. There is more involved, but that is a really basic layman's definition of CEP.

For example, the US Trident III has a CEP of 90 meters. The Tomahawk TLAM has a CEP of 80 meters. The Chinese DF-21D has a CEP of 100 meters. The SCUD-B that Iraq deployed in the Gulf War had a CEP of 450 meters.

Now what President Clinton authorized to sell to China had not a damned thing to do with the accuracy of missiles. What was authorized to be sold to China was a newer type of fuel they did not use, explosive bolts and hardware that was an improvement over what they used to eject a satellite from the missile once it hit orbit, and the hardware bus technology that would allow them to launch multiple satellites at once from a single rocket.

All of which when combined gave them all they needed to know to build their first successful ballistic missiles with MIRV multiple warhead technology.

But that is completely different from CEP. It is akin to selling the automotive technology to allow a car to go faster, and you are trying to claim it was technology to allow a car to go farther. They are not the same thing at all, not even close.

 

[Mushroom]

I say again for those who will listen: Missiles does not equal warheads. Submarine launched ballistic missiles carry multiple independently targeted reentry vehicles.

Oh, I know that. In fact, there are likely not even the same number of warheads on two different subs of the same class. As each like most other military equipment will have their own specific loadout, which can even be changed depending on the mission.

Yes, our subs use the Trident II. But I can almost promise that each submarine has a unique complement of missiles, each with a different number of warheads. And depending on the missile, that can be anywhere from one to fourteen warheads per missile.

However, that is also the design limitations of the Trident II. In reality, the number of warheads is going to be somewhere between one and four per missile. That is because that was the limit we agreed to when we signed the New-START treaty in 2010, and that is still the current treaty that is in effect in regards to the number of warheads on our ballistic submarines.

Want to know the number of warheads on a sub? They have 20 Trident SLBM tubes, that means anywhere from 20 to 80 warheads per submarine. And I can almost guarantee that no two submarines have the same loadout, so each one has a different number of warheads.

Now the general information that most accept is that on our boomers, they have 17 single warhead missiles, and 3 missiles that are in a 4 MIRV configuration for a total of 29 warheads. But once again, that is likely not an absolute, as each one would have their own loadout that was specifically designed for the potential targets they might be launched against.

I do very well understand this, but I am also trying to "keep it simple", as most in here I bet have their eyes start to glaze over when discussing things like weapon system loadouts and the capabilities.

 

[Delldude]

First of all, it helps when you actually know what you are talking about. I doubt you even understand CEP, as what President Clinton authorized to be sold to China had nothing to do with CEP.

Guess transfer of missile guidance technology wouldn't have anything to do with CEP.....or some 600 high performance computers to do calculations to support it.

 

[Mushroom]

Guess transfer of missile guidance technology wouldn't have anything to do with CEP

Reference to that?

Mr. Clinton said that he had approved the export of satellite fuel and explosive bolts, which eject the satellite from its launch vehicle.

Clinton Approves Technology Transfer to China (Published 1999)

Clinton Administration notifies Congress of approval to export technology to China to permit launching of communications satellite aboard Chinese rocket; says transfer will not harm national security or significantly improve China's military capability in space (S)

www.nytimes.com

Now through espionage they got a hell of a lot more than that, but espionage is not the same thing as an open technology transfer.

 

[Tunafish]

Let's see if you can go 5 minutes without whining.

So, did you read the material, so you can understand the national secrets the orange pile of shit was handing iout to show off?

5 minutes are up
You ain't got sheet

 

[Delldude]

Reference to that?

DOJ investigation and slap on the wrist.

It’s been six years since Loral Space & Communications Corp. disclosed what has become one of the most legendary export control enforcement cases. On January 9, the Justice Department wrapped up its investigation into Loral’s transfer of missile guidance technology to China. Loral, the world’s largest commercial satellite communications services provider, agreed to pay $14 million to settle the alleged violations of the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR). In exchange for the termination of a Justice Department investigation, the company will pay the civil fine to the State Department without admitting any wrongdoing.
_____________________________________
China’s aerospace industry has benefited from extensive state largesse and has provided a launching pad for commercial satellites since the early 1980s. The PRC boasts a well-developed commercial and ballistic missile program with an estimated arsenal of 20 ICBMs. A key manufacturer of those ICBMs is Great Wall Industry – and many experts conclude that an improvement in the guidance systems of China’s commercial boosters would likely result in similar improvements to the Chinese nuclear missiles aimed at the United States.

Loral Agrees to a $14 Million Settlement for Alleged ITAR Violations - Export Compliance Training Institute.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

5 minutes are up
You ain't got sheet

But you didn't read and don't understand the material, so your opinion of it is worthless.

 

[Tunafish]

But you didn't read and don't understand the material, so your opinion of it is worthless.

allegedly​

end of story

 

[Mushroom]

It’s been six years since Loral Space & Communications Corp. disclosed what has become one of the most legendary export control enforcement cases. On January 9, the Justice Department wrapped up its investigation into Loral’s transfer of missile guidance technology to China. Loral, the world’s largest commercial satellite communications services provider, agreed to pay $14 million to settle the alleged violations of the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR). In exchange for the termination of a Justice Department investigation, the company will pay the civil fine to the State Department without admitting any wrongdoing.

Which is exactly my point.

Was that transfer done because President Clinton authorized it? I would give a huge freaking "Hell No" to that, as if that transfer had been authorized, why was there an investigation and fines involved afterwards?

So once again, produce some kind of reference that President Clinton authorized that transfer. Because that is what you are claiming, and you have yet to produce any evidence that was the case at all.

Remember, I am pretty much neutral on this, and only trying to discuss actual facts. Myself, I do think the decision to share the things that were exchanged was stupid and should never have been done. But I also do not attach to it things that China obtained in other ways. That falls dangerously close to these kind of "Orange Man Bad" posts, which are attributing to President Trump anything they can think of.

 

[whitehall]

What secrets are related to U.S. submarines that foreign agents (and CNN) doesn't already have?