Russia has test-launched a new intercontinental ballistic missile, Russian military officials say.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6700585.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6700585.stm
Russia tests long-range missile
- Thread starter AFA
- Start date
Well, this can't really be seen as good. But better Russia than North Korea or Iran. :thumbsup: I miss the cold war..
I sure as fucking hell don't...
This concerns me because in recent months the Soviet Union and the US have been backing away from each other, partially due to Putin's fading popularity.
President Vladimir Putin has repeatedly said Russia would continue to improve its nuclear weapons systems and respond to U.S. plans to deploy a missile defense system in Europe.
First Deputy Prime Minister Sergei Ivanov said the ICBM, as well as a tactical cruise missile that also was tested Tuesday, can penetrate any missile defense system, Russian news agencies reported.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070529/ap_on_re_eu/russia_missile_test
President Vladimir Putin has repeatedly said Russia would continue to improve its nuclear weapons systems and respond to U.S. plans to deploy a missile defense system in Europe.
First Deputy Prime Minister Sergei Ivanov said the ICBM, as well as a tactical cruise missile that also was tested Tuesday, can penetrate any missile defense system, Russian news agencies reported.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070529/ap_on_re_eu/russia_missile_test
Last edited:
dick van cock
Closed Account
:thumbsup:
A favorite cold war moment:
My fellow Americans, I am pleased to tell you I just signed legislation which outlaws Russia forever. The bombing begins in five minutes.
-Ronald Reagan, said during a radio microphone test, 1984
Kingfisher
Here Zombie, Zombie, Zombie...
Ditto.
IMO, Putin spells trouble for the world. Bush seems an arrogant, ignorant spoiled brat - but basically decent. But Putin seems smart, tough and cold. Can anyone who ran the KGB effectively be anything else?
Bush frustrates me. Putin scares me.
The Russian bear was asleep. It now seems to have woken up and is hungry. For what, I am not exactly sure.
dick van cock
Closed Account
No! Putin is a wise guy! He cares about restoring Russian influence in its traditional backyard (Central Asia, Persia). He worked as an KGB agent in Eastern Germany for a while (his German is excellent) and I do believe he is a friend of the Western nations.
Where is the saber rattling against Europe or the US? Russia is merely defending itself against internal quarrels (Chechnya, Dagestan, Ossetia) and tries to fend off quarrels in ex-Soviet republics (Uzbekistan, Tajikistan).
Russia can be a key player in our relations to Iran and North Korea. I think they are a valuable partner. Let's hope for a worthy to successor when Putin resigns come the next elections.
Just because they won't let themselves be embraced by us, doesn't mean they're hostile.... quite to the contrary, I suppose...
What? Have you seen news from Russia lately? Both personal freedoms and freedom of speech is being eroded - all under Putin.
Did you see film of that gay rally in Moscow (I think it was). They were beaten by bystanders while the police watched and then the gay marchers were arrested.
Putin was head of the KGB. That means he has ordered the torture and deaths of many people.
Russia is FAR less free then it was 5 years ago. And it is getting worse.
A friend of the West? His energy policies certainly don't bear that out.
And the Russian secret police have been shown to be responsible for some pretty horrendous things in the last few years.
Right now the British are trying to get a former KGB (or Russian secret police, I am not sure which) agent deported to stand trial for the radiation poisoning and murder of that guy that died in England last year (I do not recall his name).
Why was he killed? Probably for speaking out about Putin.
Sounds like Communist Russia all over again.
Doesn't impact the US one bit ...
Neither the US TMD (theater missile defense) and NMD (national missile defense) plans are even remotely capable of defending against 1/10th the Russian land-based/launched arsenal.
That was never the point, other than the original "initiative" (i.e., SDI), which manifested into a feasible, point and limited defense system.
TMD and, to a lesser extent, NMD is about the US providing for global-based tracking as well as localized defense of its allies and its troops.
Should Russia desire to defeat the system, it can do so easily by merely launching a small portion of its arsenal.
This is just another day in the global rhetoric that provides entertainment for the lesser informed.
Now should the Soviets decide to export that technology to rogue states, then I'll be pissed off.
Then again I've seen how our TMD integrated tracking/interceptor system handles so-called "decoys" that allegedly "defeat" the tracking capabilities.
But I can't talk about that.
Neither the US TMD (theater missile defense) and NMD (national missile defense) plans are even remotely capable of defending against 1/10th the Russian land-based/launched arsenal.
That was never the point, other than the original "initiative" (i.e., SDI), which manifested into a feasible, point and limited defense system.
TMD and, to a lesser extent, NMD is about the US providing for global-based tracking as well as localized defense of its allies and its troops.
Should Russia desire to defeat the system, it can do so easily by merely launching a small portion of its arsenal.
This is just another day in the global rhetoric that provides entertainment for the lesser informed.
Now should the Soviets decide to export that technology to rogue states, then I'll be pissed off.
Then again I've seen how our TMD integrated tracking/interceptor system handles so-called "decoys" that allegedly "defeat" the tracking capabilities.
But I can't talk about that.
Re: Doesn't impact the US one bit ...
Luckily, as the end of the cold war revealed to us, only 1/10th of the Russian nuclear weapons are actually capable of launch and/or detonation anywhere near targets. We vastly overrated their conventional weapons systems as well.
H
Luckily, as the end of the cold war revealed to us, only 1/10th of the Russian nuclear weapons are actually capable of launch and/or detonation anywhere near targets. We vastly overrated their conventional weapons systems as well.
H
Re: Doesn't impact the US one bit ...
My guess is the Pentagon deliberately over estimated their capabilities.
Much easier to get funding that way.
Luckily, as the end of the cold war revealed to us, only 1/10th of the Russian nuclear weapons are actually capable of launch and/or detonation anywhere near targets. We vastly overrated their conventional weapons systems as well.
H
My guess is the Pentagon deliberately over estimated their capabilities.
Much easier to get funding that way.
Missile defense is useless for that ...
But there has never been a single weapon of deterrent for everyone.
Missile defense is merely the evolution of tactical and strategic strategy.
Just because it doesn't apply to all possible threats doesn't mean it isn't needed.
The US Command'n Control is the greatest deterrent for virtually all nations in the world.
Missile defense -- not merely just the interceptors themselves -- is the foremost aspect of that capability.
But none of that applies to terrorism -- although terrorism is not the only threat.
In fact, if the US did not have its capability, and the resulting deterrent that it merely exists, there would be far more many threats.
Many threats not just to the US, and not just to its immediate allies, either.
Deterrent, it's the difference between war and no war, and it's the best thing for security.
I thought I made this point in another thread on why we need to possess modern, tactical nukes to take out bunkers.
It's not about using them, but the threat that we have the capability, to deter those from even bothering.
Which is why TMD/NMD is not even remotely applicable to Russia, and both they and we know it.
Then missile defense becomes useless for that.
But there has never been a single weapon of deterrent for everyone.
Missile defense is merely the evolution of tactical and strategic strategy.
Just because it doesn't apply to all possible threats doesn't mean it isn't needed.
The US Command'n Control is the greatest deterrent for virtually all nations in the world.
Missile defense -- not merely just the interceptors themselves -- is the foremost aspect of that capability.
But none of that applies to terrorism -- although terrorism is not the only threat.
In fact, if the US did not have its capability, and the resulting deterrent that it merely exists, there would be far more many threats.
Many threats not just to the US, and not just to its immediate allies, either.
Deterrent, it's the difference between war and no war, and it's the best thing for security.
I thought I made this point in another thread on why we need to possess modern, tactical nukes to take out bunkers.
It's not about using them, but the threat that we have the capability, to deter those from even bothering.
Which is why TMD/NMD is not even remotely applicable to Russia, and both they and we know it.
Agreed, but still not the full story ...
At the height of the cold war, it was very well know the US maintained a Navy with 3x the size, and 3x the electronic monitoring systems, of the USSR.
This was publicly well known, and yet the US continued to fund and pay for such an major advantage.
Why? Because it's not merely about one threat, but a defense-in-depth against multiple threats.
Hell, at no time since WWII has any nation even remotely maintained even one aircraft carrier with the capability of a US Navy Nimitz Class (or even some of its predecessors).
Same goes for the US Navy Wasp Class aircraft-troop carrier, which is the ultimate arm for protection of Americans abroad.
It's that type of capability that buys deterrent that cannot be matched in so many other ways.
Especially when it comes to the over half-dozen Wasp Class ships, who can smack the fuck out of any nation who touches Americans within 24 hours with thousands of US Marines and dozens upon dozens of aircraft and land vehicles.
Hell, that is why when such a ship extracted US and other, US allied citizens from Beruit just a few months back, Hezbolla didn't shoot even a BB at its aircraft or vehicles.
Deterrent.
Agreed, but that's still not the full story.
At the height of the cold war, it was very well know the US maintained a Navy with 3x the size, and 3x the electronic monitoring systems, of the USSR.
This was publicly well known, and yet the US continued to fund and pay for such an major advantage.
Why? Because it's not merely about one threat, but a defense-in-depth against multiple threats.
Hell, at no time since WWII has any nation even remotely maintained even one aircraft carrier with the capability of a US Navy Nimitz Class (or even some of its predecessors).
Same goes for the US Navy Wasp Class aircraft-troop carrier, which is the ultimate arm for protection of Americans abroad.
It's that type of capability that buys deterrent that cannot be matched in so many other ways.
Especially when it comes to the over half-dozen Wasp Class ships, who can smack the fuck out of any nation who touches Americans within 24 hours with thousands of US Marines and dozens upon dozens of aircraft and land vehicles.
Hell, that is why when such a ship extracted US and other, US allied citizens from Beruit just a few months back, Hezbolla didn't shoot even a BB at its aircraft or vehicles.
Deterrent.
Re: Doesn't impact the US one bit ...
Oh yeah.... Definitely. From the 50s to the 80s, they were able to get a lot of things funded with the specter of the big, bad bear in the east. The MiG-25 fighter was a great example of that. I think the USAF convinced congress that there was NO WAY we had anything in the sky that could do battle with the "Foxbat". It could go almost 3 times the speed of sound! My god, it could destroy our entire air force!
We *had* to have an interceptor that could match it. Say hello to the F-15 program, which produced one of the best air-air fighters ever made.
Then Viktor Belenko defected to Japan with a MiG-25, and it was inspected tip-to-tail before it was given back to the USSR. The air force's assessment?
It was big, and fast. If it had to slow down, turn, dogfight, or engage another aircraft, it would die. Quickly. Oh well, we got the F-15 program pushed through....
:rofl:
H
Oh yeah.... Definitely. From the 50s to the 80s, they were able to get a lot of things funded with the specter of the big, bad bear in the east. The MiG-25 fighter was a great example of that. I think the USAF convinced congress that there was NO WAY we had anything in the sky that could do battle with the "Foxbat". It could go almost 3 times the speed of sound! My god, it could destroy our entire air force!
We *had* to have an interceptor that could match it. Say hello to the F-15 program, which produced one of the best air-air fighters ever made.
Then Viktor Belenko defected to Japan with a MiG-25, and it was inspected tip-to-tail before it was given back to the USSR. The air force's assessment?
It was big, and fast. If it had to slow down, turn, dogfight, or engage another aircraft, it would die. Quickly. Oh well, we got the F-15 program pushed through....
:rofl:
H
If you recall, the Tupolev TU-4 bomber was based on a captured B-29 which was carefully duplicated down to every nut and bolt. Not the last duplicate they would make
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tupolev_Tu-4
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tupolev_Tu-4
Similar threads
