Remember Russia's Nukes...

WASHINGTON, Oct. 16 (UPI) -- Under the command of the Russia's General Staff, the Strategic Rocket Forces mounted last Saturday their most ambitious nuclear and missile exercise since the fall of the Soviet Union.

They tested all three legs of the strategic triad, simultaneously launching three intercontinental ballistic missiles from land and from submarine and also delivered a nuclear strike by four strategic bombers firing standoff missiles.

Two of the bombers were Tu-95s, the old Soviet equivalent, at least in age, of America's B-52s. Dating from the 1950s, and powered by turboprops, they were known to NATO as the "Bear." The other two were Tu-160 Blackjack bombers, the equivalent of the American B-1.

No nuclear warheads were involved in the test, only the missiles that would deliver them. This was a command exercise, testing the countdown and failsafe and launch and control procedures, as well as the 4,500-mile trajectories of the ICBMs. All went according to plan, as monitored by the radars of Russia's new "Space Force," and by the Titov test center of Spacecraft Command.

They did not test the nukes; there is a Test Ban Treaty, after all. But then, the Russians have no shortage of nuclear warheads. At last count, they admitted to more than 7,000.

There have been few better demonstrations of the degree to which Russia remains a serious nuclear power, with military capabilities that put the other main nuclear pretenders, China and Britain and France, Israel, India and Pakistan, into suitably modest perspective. This was the biggest exercise for Russia's Strategic Air Force since the sudden cancellation on Sept. 11 last year -- in deference to American concerns after the terrorist attacks -- of a three-day exercise with the navy's Pacific and Northern fleets, operations that might have come uncomfortably close to U.S. territory in Alaska at a hypersensitive time.

In its own commentary on the exercise, the Russian newspaper Vremya Novostei proposed various theories to explain the timing, and the scale, of this exercise, which the Russian General Staff said was a relatively routine test of command procedures to wind up the summer training cycle.

One of the newspaper's sources said it was a none-too-subtle reminder to the West of Russian capabilities, in the month before the NATO summit at Prague formally accepts the enlargement of the alliance, and as the American forces gather around Iraq. Another source suggested that it was a preemptive response to U.S. plans, picked up by Russian intelligence, to reactivate an American nuclear test site. Yet another source, said to be close to Russian counter-intelligence, claimed that the highly expensive exercise was carried out at the suggestion of the United States to test "its own means of deterrent to the declining, but still adequate, nuclear might of the Russian Federation."

This instinctive Russian assumption that they remain such a great power that the Americans watch their every move, or that every Russian initiative has its American response (or inspiration) is touching, although possibly naïve. The U.S. military and intelligence, like their political masters, are spending less time and energy on Russia these days, and the Russian General Staff know it. The Americans also know how much expense and effort and staff time the Russians put into their exercises, and how seldom Moscow can afford to run them.

So it's tempting to think that if Russia was sending anyone a message with this reminder of its nuclear versatility, then the intended recipients were probably those to the south. The wretched performance of the Russian troops in Chechnya, along with Russian acquiescence in the installation of the U.S. military in Central Asia, has left Russia with an enfeebled image in the region.

And nukes matter. Just ask Saddam Hussein. Or consider the concern in Washington over Russia's construction of a nuclear power station for Iran at Bushehr. Periods of tension between India and Pakistan in the past attracted barely a fraction of the international alarm provoked over the last year by the tensions over Kashmir between the two new nuclear powers. So a reminder to Russia's Asian neighbors of Russia's full-spectrum nuclear capability could have its uses.

But the Russian nuclear exercise coincided with another important military test over the weekend, the fourth successful test in a row of the U.S. anti-missile defense program. A modified Minuteman ICBM target vehicle was launched from Vandenberg Air Force Base in California, and the prototype interceptor was fired 22 minutes later and 4,800 miles away from Kwajalein atoll. Six minutes later, and 140 miles above the earth, the target was hit right on the nose.

As America's National Missile Defenses begin to look rather more credible, the real message of Russia's strategic exercise may have been to remind the United States, and to reassure itself, that even if the odd ICBM can now be shot down, an old and impoverished superpower that can still deliver nukes from land and sea and from the air must still be taken seriously.

Ive heard a lot of the Russian nukes now don't work( I think they deliberately sold the Arabs some of the duds) I've also heard that Israel and France( yeah your reading this correctly) at least have some real capability its just hearsay I can't prove it.

France does have a potent nuclear capability (when i use the word 'potent' i am really trying to stay within the parameters of relativity ....and trying not to giggle! Why? Because in comparison to the average country France's nuclear capability is awesome ....but in comparison to the US it is pathetic! The state of Montana has by far a greater nuclear force in the Mamstrom(sp) base than the whole of France. California has enough to lay waste to the whole of Europe. And i am talking in terms of both sheer quantity and advanced quality. Hence relatively speaking France may be a 'mighty nuclear power' when compared to Belgium or Djiboti or Chile, but when compared to the US it does not even register).

As for Israel there are continuous rumors that it possesses some nuclear capability. It ranges from 20 to 100 weapons, and the capability shifts from fission to fusion weapons. I would think they would have fusion warheads, possibly with some being plane launched and the reminder on some sort of intermediate range ballistic missile (since all of Israel's potential enemies are quite near to it). And there was a report i stumbled across that said Israel was trying to convert one of its submarines to have the ability to launch cruise missiles. This could mean Israel would be looking for a nuclear cruise missile (since to launch conventional cruise missiles from a sub requires large numbers of missiles to make them really effective). And while nuclear cruise missiles are illegal due to treaty (the Soviets had subs purely with nuke cruise missiles, and the US ALCM was orginally supposed to be nuclear, but treaties ensured cruise missiles were made conventional), i doubt that would be an issue for the Israelis. If they have gne as far as developing a nuclear program i doubt they will let something as insignificant as a treaty stop them from developing new delivery systems like the submarine launched nuclear cruise missiles.

And think of what a strategic asset that would be. Even if its enemies developed integrated air defence systems to down Israeli airplanes delivering a nuke strike, and even if they somehow managed to smuggle a fission device to Tel Aviv and blow that city up, Israel would still have the option of using a sub to launch a NCM and blow them up! I guess that is why Israel would be yearning for submarine launched cruise missile ability.

And the thing is if i came across that information (of Israel looking for sub missile launch capability) then it means that Israel must ahve already acquired it years ago! They are very good at obfuscation.

As for the Russian nukes not working i would not be so sure of that! And the report above seems to suggest at least some are in perfect working order. Sure, some of their old missile systems are getting a little long in the tooth! And even their once venerable SS-18 ICBMs and their SLBMs are getting a little old! And i am sure the percentage of those in tip-top shape is not as high percentage wise as the US nuclear force! That is a fact.

However the thing is the US has been paying Russia a lot of cash to get rid of its nuclear systems (under the arms reduction treaty) and thus Russia has managed to destroy a lot of these old ballistic systems!

And the money they get from it is used to develop new missiles.For example check out the new Topol-M ICBM and its capabilities, which include an ability to break through missile defence cordons without the use of decoys (which was the way deception was done in the past with balloons and the like). And then there is the development of the RSM-52 SLBM that is going on (the Topol-M has already been deployed but the RSM is still in the testing phase).

Thus it can be said the Russians definitely do not have the massive clout they had in the Soviet era (where they had literally thousands upon thousands of nuclear weapons ....with some estimates, that seem high actually, saying upwards of 30,000). Today they do not have the money to pay for the upkeep of even 5,000 weapons, and thus i am certain they are relieved with the whole arms reduction treaty since it allows them to save face and destroy the excess missiles (which are in any case already obsolete), yet at the same time provides them with the money to develop new systems like the Topol-M which are reliable and advanced. I would say they got a sweetheart deal!

What did the US get then? Well, the world is a safer place when Russia has a smaller number of weapons than when it has myriads ranging from nuclear mines (yep, nuclear land mines) to artillery shells, to SRBM/SLBM/IRBM/ICBMs and the like! A fewer number (that are dependable) is a good thing for the US.

Thus everyone is happy.

As for the sale of Russian nukes to the Arabs i really doubt the veracity of that event. I do not think it happened! I know the Mafiya (Russian Mafia) are said to have sold Osama some 'bomb' that turned out to be just a case of stuff that could set of a geiger counter and had zero potency, but again i am not even sure if that really did happen or not. And while the Mafiya are ruthless (i saw a report showing how they have spread in the US and displaced the older groups like the Sicillians ....to the effect it seems the only organized gangs are the Mafiya and the Chinese Triads and Tongs since the Italian gents have either been killed, forced out of the country, or forced to go legit), even if they are ruthless they are not stupid! They know if they sold a real bomb to Al Queda they would be smashed!

And again why would Al queda buy a Russian nuke (that has layers of codes to ensure that even if stolen it cannot be detonated without several security codes punched in tandem) when the can go to Pakistan and get a fission device from the ISI that has helped them in the past? Obviously not in the same league as the Ruskie stuff, but once a fission device detonates i doubt the people in the epicenter will be exchanging notes saying they are lucky it was not a Russian fusion device. When you are in the blast radius the difference between fission and fusion becomes moot. Either way you are toast!

And as for the US. Enough capability to ensure if some nation did a no-no we could launch hades up theirs! (Obviously it depends on who is president, but if it is someone who does not care what the UN thinks then the rogue nation would discover just how powerful the Minuteman 3s and Poseidons are). And i believe they are upgrading the Minuteman3s this week and giving them new propulsion and battery units. Thus the US is more than ready to whoop @$$. However the target this time is nations like N. Korea and China (instead of the former primary target of the Ruskies). That is a big change in a number of ways, and i even see a time when Russia will be our greatest ally economically and politically.

A true sea change!

Saber-rattling is useless without a saber, and this is pretty much the role of Russian long-range aviation and strategic rocket forces. Without their nukes, Russia is Canada, but with Belgium's GNP. Hardly worthy of the prestige of summits and UN Security Counsel veto rights.

During the Yugoslavian campaign, Russia learned the hard way what good it was to trust to the "good intentions" of the West. Since then she has embarked on modernization and maintenance of her nuclear capability.

Russia would be America's most deadly adversary - as is America Russia's, but neither country is each other's MOST LIKELY foe. Russia has lots of nukes and whether most are operational is a moot point - the ability to destroy the US 200 times or 20 times is only a matter of scale. One nuke blast is too many.

The US anti-missile shield couldn't protect against a Russian all-out attack, which it isn't designed against anyway. Russia wouldn't attack the US unless threatened with extinction.

This mutually-assured destruction, however, only works between SANE countries. A missile shield is needed against INSANE countries such as North Korea, Iraq, Iran, and possibly China. Even better than a missile shield is preemption, removing cancers before they grow to inoperable size, but Western mentality isn't ready for this. I suppose we'll have to wait for NY or LA to go bye-bye first.

Nuclear arms in reality are a useless investment for SANE countries. They are a way of looking scary on the cheap, but overall they have little significance - since they never use them. Even after NY and LA get nuked by "unknown terrorists", the US will still not go nuclear. The response will be more special ops, black ops, and UN crap.

Whether Russia has seven hundred or seven thousand warheads, they have too many to take care of. Which is why they are scaling back, disposing of obsolete and high-maintenance weapons systems and concentrating on quality over quantity. The Bear bomber goes back to Khrushchev, but it's dependable. Monstrous, Oscar-class APRKs (atomic underwater missile cruisers) like the Kursk require less maintenance and combat crews than many small boombers. And ditto for the land-based missiles. Too many nukes are a black hole in the budget, since a few well-trained, well-equipped divisions - or even a brigade of capable soldiers -protect Russian vital interests better.

It is not the US, or even China, who are dismembering Russia, but radical Islam.

The Pristina stand-off ended after the Russian war games sent shivers down NATO's collective spine..with the Russians in control of Pristina and her legendary mountain/bunker hangers.

Russian bombers fly within striking distance of U.S.

The flight of the long-range Russian bombers took some at the Pentagon by surprise, sources said. We didn't think they could do that any more," said one officer close to the incident. This demonstrates some kind of capability" in the Russian military that many observers thought they had lost."

"Lots of people thought they couldn't do stuff like that anymore," said a well-placed military official. "Maybe we were wrong."

Russia surprised NATO at the end of the air war against Yugoslavia when they sent about 200 troops from Bosnia into Kosovo ahead of NATO peacekeepers and seized the airport at Pristina, despite Moscow's assurances the troops would not enter Kosovo.

The most recent Russian military move comes as Moscow is attempting to renegotiate a deal in Kosovo to give its peacekeepers more authority over Serb areas.

The appearance of the bombers near Iceland may have been intended to send a message to the United States, according to a Pentagon official who said the act seemed "calculated." He said it may be a way for the Russian military leadership to say, "We're still around."

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.