some_beer_drinker: [www.empireonline.com image 355x400]knows a thing or two about heavily armed battlestations...wait....
That's no moon.It's a space station.
hardinparamedic: [31.media.tumblr.com image 454x500]On the other hand....[i.imgur.com image 310x310]
FrancoFile: buckler: Isn't there an international treaty preventing any country from claiming any territory on the Moon?Like the Chinese care about that?
Rapmaster2000: fusillade762: [i.dailymail.co.uk image 634x396]So *that's* what the Death Star looks like...That's a typo. They meant Dogstar.[userserve-ak.last.fm image 480x480]
Infernalist: stratagos: threadjackistan: JesseL: Why in the world would you want to launch missiles from the moon instead of your own orbital platform?Flight time from the moon to Earth is going to be pretty long - the Apollo missions took at least about three days. You could reduce that but not by a huge amount.You'll be working against a gravity well.Any launch is going to be easy to detect.The value of putting a missle base on the moon would be in second or "revenge" strike capabilities. Basically so your opponent couldnt hope to launch a surprise attack and destroy your ability to retaliate.Subs are cheaper, by several orders of magnitudeThis. And far more likely to hit what they're aiming at.
CHINKS ON OUR MOON!WE CANNOT ALLOW A MOON MISSILE GAP!BACK TO THE MOON FUTURE!
TomD9938: It's outrageous that they would make this anouncement of their hostile intentions just two days before the anniversary of their attack on Pearl Harbor.Talk about a tin ear.
Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.
When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.
Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.
You need to create an account to submit links or post comments.
Click here to submit a link.
Also on Fark
Submit a Link »
Copyright © 1999 - 2017 Fark, Inc | Last updated: Jan 20 2017 19:27:36
Runtime: 0.332 sec (332 ms)