Posted on 12/24/2005 10:40:06 AM PST by Dan Evans
The chief of Russia's strategic forces on Saturday attended the deployment of a new set of state-of-the art intercontinental ballistic missiles, boasting of their capability to penetrate any prospective missile defense, news reports said.
Col. Gen. Nikolai Solovtsov, chief of the Strategic Missile Forces, took part in a ceremony that marked the commissioning of the latest set of Topol-M missiles at a missile base in Tatishchevo in the Volga River's Saratov region.
Solovtsov said Saturday that the new missile "is capable of penetrating any missile defense system," the RIA Novosti and Interfax news agencies reported.
Russian officials have called prospective U.S. missile defenses destabilizing and boasted repeatedly that Russia's new missiles could pierce any nation's missile shield.
The Topol-M missiles, capable of hitting targets more than 10,000 kilometers (6,000 miles) away, have so far been deployed in silos. The mobile version, mounted on a heavy off-road vehicle, is to enter combat service next year, Solovtsov said.
The deployed Topol-Ms have been fitted with single nuclear warheads, but officials have considered plans to equip each missile with three individually targeted warheads.
Developing...
Aren't we in the process of destroying a good portion of our warheads?
Merry Christmas to us. Thank you Russia. \end{sarcasm}
All their reporters are in the C.I.A. commisary.
If the Russians are smart, they will target at least half of them on the Islamic world.
Thanks for posting this.
Here's a couple links about the 'Bulava'
SS-NX-30 missile
http://www.missilethreat.com/missiles/ss-nx-30_russia.html
---
Sept 27, 2005
Russia Tests Bulava SS-NX-30 SLBM For First Time
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1492472/posts
fyi.. MissileThreat.com is a Claremont Institute website.
http://www.claremont.org/
The Evil Empire never went away!
A man who earns 10.00 a month won't go to war to protect a Chinese factory making toys for Americans. A Russian won't go to war to fight the guys that bring modern stores and modern hospitals to their country.
Merry Christmas world we are giving you a reason not to fight, but if you do we are ready!!
I think they morphed into something more sinister. They are playing nice while they do everything they can to infiltrate us, corrupt us and weaken us from within. All the bad guys in the world are getting their AK-47s and their RPG-7s from Russia and China. Now they are upgrading their ICBM capability and trying to pass it off as a peaceful conversion of "swords into plowshares":
Russians harness Cold War demons for space
"Three days before Christmas, Satan will rise on a column of flame over Russia. But instead of death for millions, the event should mark an amazing conversion of Cold War swords into plowshares.
“Satan” is the NATO code name for the SS-18 intercontinental ballistic missile. The Soviet Union built and deployed hundreds of SS-18s in underground silos east of the Ural Mountains, and 130 remain on active duty at three bases. They each carried up to 10 thermonuclear warheads. But now the aging missiles are being decommissioned, and some of them are being converted to commercial space launch vehicles."
This is mainly PR The missile shield is never gonna stop a first strike from Russia. They have 10,000 warheads. The shield is only good for small rogue nations.
Think of a nuclear missile as a great big gun. If you point it at someone, and he thinks you might use it, and if he is a coward, you don't have to fight. You win.
It depends on how much we spend. If a large city can prevent a few million deaths by spending a few billion dollars, it would be worth it.
if the Russians were to funnel arms to the Taliban now I believe we would be in the same situation they were in.
Maybe. But you wouldn't need to stop all of them. If a few get through, enough of us will be left to retaliate.
Are there people who are suggesting we do away with our retaliatory forces?
You right. Russia disposed lot of old soviet stuff. And this process continues. After 2010 Russia will have something about 1000 strategic weapons. Compare with 10 times bigger soviet arsenal which was disposed on american money.
SO now Russia creates new missile which in lesser quantity will do job tomorrow. In enviroment of ABM, laser connons and so on.
The problem is that they have 5000+ warheads from land air and sea plus hydrogen bombs.==
ASAIK about 2000+. 5000+ was long ago and it was soviet arsenal.
This is mainly PR The missile shield is never gonna stop a first strike from Russia. They have 10,000 warheads. ==
You mistook Soviet Union for Russia. Russia doesn't have no 10000 warheads. 5 time lesser. And this number continues to dwindle. SO Russia needs new missile which will do job in lesser numbers.
In addition, for arms to get into Afganistan they would have to cross borders of former members of the Soviet Union, who now get US money to fight the Taliban. It is very hard to move products of any quantity across so many borders and a population that is tired of war.
Can we afford for all nations world wide to get along? Wouldn't that move the world into a globalist society? I for one, do not like that idea.
" Maybe. But you wouldn't need to stop all of them. If a few get through, enough of us will be left to retaliate.
Are there people who are suggesting we do away with our retaliatory forces?
What i was saying is that it doesn't matter whether or not Russia has missiles that evade our defense system since they have enough missiles to overwhelm any conceivable system.
This makes our retaliatory missiles as important as ever.
In addition, the Russian military knows that we have a battle tested and urban warfare hardened military. This battle training is something no army in the world has had in the past 50 years. Urban warfare is now the new level of skill owned by our military. Russia is still working out how to beat a rebel force in their own country.
"You mistook Soviet Union for Russia. Russia doesn't have no 10000 warheads. 5 time lesser. And this number continues to dwindle. SO Russia needs new missile which will do job in lesser numbers."
I stand corrected about current Russian numbers.
Interestingly Uzbekistan has recently seen fit to halt all US overflights and as of a month ago kicked all of our military guys out of the country. Not to mention that there seems to be absolutely no problem with funneling all of the thousands of tonnes of Heroin out of Afghanistan crossing dozens of borders and oceans to feed the Wests desire to get high. My point is that if a major power wanted to it could make the price of having troops in Afghanistan way to high and prohibitive for us.
Great point - I didn't think of it that way!!!
WWII ended in Japan without us having to invade the mainland. We lost a lot of guys in island-hopping, which, in the end, just served to get our aircraft close enough to Tokyo so we could win the war. But if we had been able to get our nuclear bombers in range without it, we wouldn't have needed boots on the ground.
That's not to say we don't also need a conventional military as you point out.
At this time all the missiles in Russian can't deliver a troop convoy while the sub service and the troop transport service is rusting on the ground.
During the cold war, NATO was uncertain as to whether they could counter Soviet tank invasion with conventional forces. That is why we built up our tactical nuclear forces (and the "neutron" bomb). Nukes were a poor man's deterrent.
But nukes can still be a threat to people who can't retaliate in kind. Japan, Taiwan and South Korea do not have a nuclear force to counter the threat from China. They have to rely on the promise of an American response. But I would be nervous about what that promise is worth -- especially if someone like Hillary is in the White House.
So I think the Russians and the Chinese are thinking long-term. The new missiles may not be that useful today, but who knows about tomorrow.
Wasn't Topol in Fiddler on the Roof?
Careful, Zarf.
As to your point about Japan, we had the troops ready to land and the leaders knew that they could fight their people with an invasion, but first we would drop half a dozen bombs that would make our job easier. They knew that troops would still arrive if they did not surrender.
You don't address the central point I made - will the Afganie people be willing to start another civil war?
Oh that's easy! You tell the kid he is throwing off his capitalist chains, confiscating the means of production for the people. We've been there done that a dozen times over. Third Reich, Soviet Union, etc. Hating the rich is nothing new.
As to your point about Japan, we had the troops ready to land and the leaders knew that they could fight their people with an invasion, but first we would drop half a dozen bombs that would make our job easier. They knew that troops would still arrive if they did not surrender.
That's right. So as fanatical as the Japanese were, they saw the handwriting on the wall and we didn't lose any soldiers invading the main island of Japan.
That was not the first time something like that happened. Other countries have been surrendered to overwhelming force without firing a shot. The Germans marched into Paris unopposed.
It all depends on the character of the defenders, the relative strength and credibility of attackers to do what they threaten to do.
That's the paradox of military might. If you have enough of it, you won't need to use it.
Merry Xmas to you as well. Am I missing something, or US Army already controls the rest of Afghanistan?
PS: Daylight downtown patrols do not count.
PPS: My post in any way not intended to diminish the bravery of US soldiers fighting there. It is just to say that bragging never won any wars.
Blame it on Reagan...Sarc.
In Russia the old worker anthem was, "The pretend to pay us and we pretend to work." People who are free and see how the world lives have a hard time going to war. It is possible that in 60 years someone in Russia could make the arguement for a war, but they have had 6% GDP growth for 10 years, in 10 more years they will get lazy instead of hungry.
And the Soviet Union collapsed and the current Russian regime came into existence for pretty much the same reason. So what? Young people who try to account for their poverty relative to the West are not necessarily going to come to the correct conclusion. If someone tells them that America and the Jews stole all the money, a certain percentage of thugs will believe them and the rest will go along out of fear. Just blame your nation's problems on other people. That's how the Stalinists and the Nazis came to power.
This principle works even in the US. The riots in Los Angeles were based on hatred of the shop owners and wealthy. The were just getting back at the "man". Greed and envy mixed with racial pride. It can work anywhere.
You don't need poverty to convince young recruits to go to war. They might do it to protect the nation and what they already have, or they will do it because they think their country will profit, or they might do it because they were drafted and they are afraid to resist.
It is possible that in 60 years someone in Russia could make the arguement for a war, but they have had 6% GDP growth for 10 years
So what? In the Third Reich, Mr Schicklgruber oversaw one of the greatest expansions of industrial production and civil improvement Germany had ever seen. The unemployment rate was falling. But they still were able to convince kids to go to war. Didn't take 60 years, all it takes is one generation of indoctrination and brainwashing. And Russians have a lot of experience in that area. And so do the Chinese.
Isn't it odd, if we deployed a new generation of ballistic
missles, every peacenik, and anti-nuke freakazoid on the
planet would be marching and sitting in,on the front of our
embassies from Gazalla to Lower Slobobia.
Odd eh.
Absolutely, without a doubt.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.