From hearing on the news, as well as in my Poly-Sci class this morning, that Vladimir Putin and those in his admin are developing a new type of nuclear weapon that no one else will be allowed to have, and will be unlike anything the world has ever seen. Could this just be political propaganda or something totally different? Your thoughts...

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6509708/

They say a new Nuke but I see a new missile.

I don't think there is much chance that the US will go toe to toe with Nukes but NATO is at the front door of Moscow and they may need a reminder that Moscow is not Belgrade.

old reb

Sounds like Dop and Vile were right on their opinions of them bulking up their military technology. Although, to me, this "new nuke" sounds like political propaganda to me. Why say anything about it, unless you have a finished product and are confident in its ability?

From how I understand it, this nuke is to be used to combat terrorism only. But think about it, for every terrorist we'd kill with a nuke, we'd kill about 10 or more civilians, which isn't exactly the view that Russia, the U.S., or any country for that matter, would want to have happen...it almost sounds like a rehash of the days with the Carter administration where the Neutron Bomb was a feasible, but rejected idea.

After doing a little research online, this missile apparently has a maneuverable warhead that would make it capable of evading anti-missile systems.

Here's a site with info on various Russian missiles:

http://www.softwar.net/rfed.html

Interesting, the article suggests a Scramjet with a nuclear weapon. It would be fast and highly manuverable in the upper atmosphere. It would easily evade our current generation of nuclear missle defense, which doesn't work all that well anyway.

perhaps this ar e why Canada an d US will put missles in Californeia to NWT.

Nah, this isn't eaxctly an Arms Race. Besides, as far as we're concerned, they're an ally in the war on terrorism. Besides, they've still got enough nukes to wipe us off the map anyway, why would they need to build up something else to use against us? (Considering the Cold War repeats itself).

we don't need another cold war, and i juts see this heading in that direction. we can't have anothr superpower now, can we?

No we can't, but do you really think the world wants to go through something like that again?

If anyone here can explain how nuclear missiles are useful in the (bogus) "war against terrorism". Unless they plan a final solution for the "terrorist" chechnya.

This is about Russia pretending to be a world power again. Nothing more than that.

Originally posted by DrewM
This is about Russia pretending to be a world power again. Nothing more than that.

I think that's part of it. I also think that Russia is demonstrating that they are capable of manufacturing state-of-the-art military technology, and are willing to export such technology to whoever can pay cash.

But the question that comes up is: are these weapons the rael thing, or is this another Cuban Missile Crisis scenario, where speculations were high (and confirmed) that the Soviet's nuclear warheads, if and when placed in Cuba, would never reach the heart of the country, let alone the mainland (e.g. New York, D.C., Los Angeles and pretty much all points north of Florida)? The Missiles that were to be stored in Cuba wouldn't even have come close to being considered a large nuclear arsenal in the world. The Soviet Union really dug a hole for itself on that one, which has me believing as well, that this is just Russian propaganda.

why would Russia need a missle defense evading nuke to fight terrorists? how many terrorist camps or countries have missle defese shields? its clear this was aimed at the US and its missle shield. the US really is designing terrorist fighting nukes. We are making ground penetrating tactical nukes to destroy underground complexes and such where terror bases and hideouts can hide

The missile is supposedly a stealth missile that would easily pass by our defense shields and radars and such (pretty much what Trav covered). But like Trav said, why would you need a nuke to fight terrorism? Like I said before, if you use nukes to combat terrorism, for every terrorist you kill, there goes about 10 or so civilians. Again, such an action would tarnish the image of any nation for a considerable amount of time.

Given the indiscriminate way Russia has fought terrorism in Chechnya, the problem of civilian casualties might not bother them. It makes for a simple strategy, the terrorist who blew up the apartment building came from village X, therefore we nuke village X. No Russian troops are killed, and pretty soon the Chechens stop, or they are all dead.

Originally posted by Imagineer
Given the indiscriminate way Russia has fought terrorism in Chechnya, the problem of civilian casualties might not bother them. It makes for a simple strategy, the terrorist who blew up the apartment building came from village X, therefore we nuke village X. No Russian troops are killed, and pretty soon the Chechens stop, or they are all dead.
But you can't really assume that glory is going to come to you just because you nuked a country. If that happened, Russia would face world isolation and probly lose its allies. Does a nuke really solve the world's problems?

"Death solves all problems. No man, no problem."

Josef Stalin

so you would pretty much want the world to end to cure all of our problems?

Originally posted by silverbulletkc
so you would pretty much want the world to end to cure all of our problems?

To Honestly Have World peace on this Planet, we would have to kill every living person.

Humans are a destructive pressence that destories all it see's. The Cure is to destory us all.

But animals kill other animals and actually eat them on a regular basis...so to achieve an even greater amount of world peace, should they be killed off too?

Originally posted by Agent Day
The Cure is to destory us all.

Oh come on, they're not that bad. Some of their songs are pretty good! ;)

Originally posted by silverbulletkc
so you would pretty much want the world to end to cure all of our problems?

I was just quoting the great athiest left wing leader Stalin, nothing more, nothing less.

Pogrom's are a long standing Russian tradition. Nukes are just a more efficient way of carrying them out.

I agree with one of Travh's postings. This new technology, if it works, is a means of defeating a theoretical missle defense system being pursued by the U.S. At the very least, Russia could be looking after its own self interests, at worst, Russia sees a coming conflict with the United States and wishes for an ace in the hole.

I'd like to see Russia become Democratized and an ally of the U.S., but that does seem a long way off.

Originally posted by Imagineer
Given the indiscriminate way Russia has fought terrorism in Chechnya, the problem of civilian casualties might not bother them. It makes for a simple strategy, the terrorist who blew up the apartment building came from village X, therefore we nuke village X. No Russian troops are killed, and pretty soon the Chechens stop, or they are all dead.


I debated some Chechen Muslims for years and reasearched the subject. The Islamic terrorist battle Russian army then set up shop in cities like Grozny. The Islamics were professional special forces against Russian recuits who were poorly led and didn't even have up to date maps of the cities they were fighting in. The Russian suffered terrible losses so the just move back and blew the place up.

This works very well for the Islamics. They invest a small force and Russian troops and Russian cities suffer heavily. People in the Russian cities now hate Russian army and it is now easier for the Islamics to convert the already Muslim communities. Islamics thrive in rubble cities.



old reb

Originally posted by Darth Be'lal
I agree with one of Travh's postings. This new technology, if it works, is a means of defeating a theoretical missle defense system being pursued by the U.S. At the very least, Russia could be looking after its own self interests, at worst, Russia sees a coming conflict with the United States and wishes for an ace in the hole.

I'd like to see Russia become Democratized and an ally of the U.S., but that does seem a long way off.

Nato has moved into Moscows front door, China has border conflicts with Russia. Russia's army would be hard pressed to defend against either. Nukes is a protection wall that they cling to. As far as using nukes, if Putin fired a nuke, he would be dead the same day. It is called MAD.

Iran, on the other hand has stated that nuclear war with Israel would be expensive for Islam but it would be the end for Israel.


old reb