Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 5
and then

Will miscalculation be the end of us?

47 posts in this topic

http://freebeacon.com/national-security/russia-sharply-expanding-nuclear-arsenal-upgrading-underground-facilities/?utm_source=Freedom+Mail&utm_campaign=010c8aad83-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2017_12_12&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_b5e6e0e9ea-010c8aad83-45645901

It seems that our good friend Vladimir Vladimirovich has decided that the best defense is a REALLY good offense.  Plans are being implemented that will greatly enlarge the Russian non-strategic nuclear stockpile.  Thousands of new low and very low yield NUKES are being built and deployed to enable Russia to overcome the NATO (read: U.S.) military advantage in conventional forces.  The plan is to intentionally use nukes EARLY in any conflict with the U.S. or his neighbors in Europe.  Have we really reached the point where leaders think that they can use nukes (of ANY size) and not bring about the annihilation of their country and subsequent annihilation of a huge part of humanity?  Is it really so difficult for them to grasp that no nation, except maybe France, would watch their fielded forces be vaporized and then not respond in kind and on a more massive scale?  I believe that it reflects an expectation that Russia's opponents in any conflict would be constrained to behave in a civilized manner. This is insanity, my friends.  

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, and then said:

This is insanity, my friends.  

:mellow: Yes it is......

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another post predicting the Apocalypse. How many does that make it now, and then? 

Edited by ExpandMyMind

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, and then said:

http://freebeacon.com/national-security/russia-sharply-expanding-nuclear-arsenal-upgrading-underground-facilities/?utm_source=Freedom+Mail&utm_campaign=010c8aad83-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2017_12_12&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_b5e6e0e9ea-010c8aad83-45645901

It seems that our good friend Vladimir Vladimirovich has decided that the best defense is a REALLY good offense.  Plans are being implemented that will greatly enlarge the Russian non-strategic nuclear stockpile.  Thousands of new low and very low yield NUKES are being built and deployed to enable Russia to overcome the NATO (read: U.S.) military advantage in conventional forces.  The plan is to intentionally use nukes EARLY in any conflict with the U.S. or his neighbors in Europe.  Have we really reached the point where leaders think that they can use nukes (of ANY size) and not bring about the annihilation of their country and subsequent annihilation of a huge part of humanity?  Is it really so difficult for them to grasp that no nation, except maybe France, would watch their fielded forces be vaporized and then not respond in kind and on a more massive scale?  I believe that it reflects an expectation that Russia's opponents in any conflict would be constrained to behave in a civilized manner. This is insanity, my friends.  

Modern nuclear weapons using mostly tritium can be detonated as an airburst or ground weapon. Airburst produces no fallout, and the fallout from ground detonations doesnt cause a nuclear winter lasting 200 years as some films claim. Its 14 days before its safe to go outside for an hour each day.

If a country has prepared a stockpile of water and food, uncontaminated soil, seeds and life stock, machines and tools to rebuild, as well as enough bunkers for the population a nuclear conflict is survivable with most citizens left alive. Lets say thats $100 billion, then thats far cheaper than spending a few trillion on WW3.

Not only could Russia defeat the US in a first move nuclear strike, North Korea could. ICBMs are basically un-defendable. If North Korea shot off 10 of its current nukes you could expect US defences to shoot down about 2 of them.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, RabidMongoose said:

Not only could Russia defeat the US in a first move nuclear strike, North Korea could. ICBMs are basically un-defendable. If North Korea shot off 10 of its current nukes you could expect US defences to shoot down about 2 of them.

It would appear you are correct..

Reuters (July) - Can the US defend against ICBM?

Quote

Experts caution that U.S. missile defenses are now geared to shooting down one, or perhaps a small number of basic, incoming missiles. Were North Korea’s technology and production to keep advancing, U.S. defenses could be overwhelmed unless they keep pace with the threat.

“Over the next four years, the United States has to increase its current capacity of our deployed systems, aggressively push for more and faster deployment,” said Riki Ellison, founder of the Missile Defense Advocacy Alliance. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, and then said:

http://freebeacon.com/national-security/russia-sharply-expanding-nuclear-arsenal-upgrading-underground-facilities/?utm_source=Freedom+Mail&utm_campaign=010c8aad83-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2017_12_12&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_b5e6e0e9ea-010c8aad83-45645901

It seems that our good friend Vladimir Vladimirovich has decided that the best defense is a REALLY good offense.  Plans are being implemented that will greatly enlarge the Russian non-strategic nuclear stockpile.  Thousands of new low and very low yield NUKES are being built and deployed to enable Russia to overcome the NATO (read: U.S.) military advantage in conventional forces.  The plan is to intentionally use nukes EARLY in any conflict with the U.S. or his neighbors in Europe.  Have we really reached the point where leaders think that they can use nukes (of ANY size) and not bring about the annihilation of their country and subsequent annihilation of a huge part of humanity?  Is it really so difficult for them to grasp that no nation, except maybe France, would watch their fielded forces be vaporized and then not respond in kind and on a more massive scale?  I believe that it reflects an expectation that Russia's opponents in any conflict would be constrained to behave in a civilized manner. This is insanity, my friends.  

Well, guess what sent USSR into oblivion (and nowadays Russia is just half of that)? With Russian government ruled ineffective economy, government ruled ineffective business (19 mini submarines as blunt example) we may see second partition: some republics (South-East Siberia) becoming independent, some coming into Chinese protectorate (Far East).

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

correct me if im wrong - Russia is the only Nation who exercises in the use of tactical nukes. As displayed in their recent Zapad 17 exercise. Shock horror Russia moves to secure its borders from external threats. The encroachment by the west read European Union in Ukraine done wonders and set us back more than a few decades. - One gets the feeling if Russia is going to make a move it will be soon.

 

 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, and then said:

It seems that our good friend Vladimir Vladimirovich has decided that the best defense is a REALLY good offense.  Plans are being implemented that will greatly enlarge the Russian non-strategic nuclear stockpile. 

Well, no ****. Could it have anything to do with good ol' Uncle Sam and the NATO Defensive Alliance* continually building up its purely defensive Military Might right on his borders, and continually holding purely defensive exercises involving thousands of tanks and aircraft and tens of thousands of purely defensive troops right on his borders? You don't think he might be rather keen to ensure that war never comes to Russian soil again? But then, he isn't human is he, and isn't subject to human emotions, and far less rational thought. 

 

* :rofl: 

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, RabidMongoose said:

Modern nuclear weapons using mostly tritium can be detonated as an airburst or ground weapon. Airburst produces no fallout, and the fallout from ground detonations doesnt cause a nuclear winter lasting 200 years as some films claim. Its 14 days before its safe to go outside for an hour each day.

If a country has prepared a stockpile of water and food, uncontaminated soil, seeds and life stock, machines and tools to rebuild, as well as enough bunkers for the population a nuclear conflict is survivable with most citizens left alive. Lets say thats $100 billion, then thats far cheaper than spending a few trillion on WW3.

Not only could Russia defeat the US in a first move nuclear strike, North Korea could. ICBMs are basically un-defendable. If North Korea shot off 10 of its current nukes you could expect US defences to shoot down about 2 of them.

It's your position that a first strike by Russia (in this instance) could be victorious because static missile locations could be saturated?  I'm not sure that I follow your reasoning.  Physics haven't changed and neither has the ability for either Russia or the U.S. to detect massed numbers of launches in time to retaliate.  The point of the thread was to ponder whether MAD is still accepted as being madness.  The fact that Russian war plans seem to be envisioning surgical nuclear strikes to eliminate "threats" against the Motherland - even if the Motherland's troops are in someone else's backyard - isn't about traditional doctrine.  THIS is a whole new level of crazy.  It lowers the threshold for global disaster and it seems to do so based on some very tenuous assumptions about the reactions that are expected from the U.S. and NATO.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, stevewinn said:

correct me if im wrong - Russia is the only Nation who exercises in the use of tactical nukes. [...]

OK, when was their last exercise in tactical nukes?

27 minutes ago, stevewinn said:

[...] As displayed in their recent Zapad 17 exercise. [...]

Nukes? Where? When?

27 minutes ago, stevewinn said:

[...]The encroachment by the west read European Union in Ukraine done wonders and set us back more than a few decades. - One gets the feeling if Russia is going to make a move it will be soon.

Yeah, stick you tongue into Putins bumhole, that will solve conflict. Hmmm, how that worked for USSR back in 1941?

Edited by bmk1245

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Manfred von Dreidecker said:

Well, no ****. Could it have anything to do with good ol' Uncle Sam and the NATO Defensive Alliance* continually building up its purely defensive Military Might right on his borders, and continually holding purely defensive exercises involving thousands of tanks and aircraft and tens of thousands of purely defensive troops right on his borders? You don't think he might be rather keen to ensure that war never comes to Russian soil again? But then, he isn't human is he, and isn't subject to human emotions, and far less rational thought. 

 

* :rofl: 

Have a cuppa and settle down, big boy.  I'm in no way trying to imply that Russia doesn't have a right to self-defense.  I'm talking about the overall change in thinking.  Ponder it soberly.  If his military is thinking in terms of going to small, low-yield NUKES to attack troop formations and armor then what ELSE are they considering?  It's a valid question.  Putin has every right to do what he feels is best for his nation, up to the point where he might endanger the planet.  At that point, he becomes scary-dude.  Also, that "buildup" was tiny and was just to send a message - after Crimea was absorbed and eastern Ukraine invaded by his little green men - that he should probably not expect to continue such adventurism without risking war.  There are no massed formations of troops or armor near his borders.  It's the sanctions that he's p***ed about.  

I'd be surprised if you didn't understand the terrible potential of this new doctrine.  He's assuming that he can punch us in the mouth, hard and fast, and we'll go down without a fight and accept the loss of hundreds or thousands of dead troops rather than risk our country.  If the guy sitting in the big chair were still Obama, he might well be right.  I can assure you that ANY president who reacted in that way would be quickly removed, one way or another.  As to the idea that America wants to invade Russia...really?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, bmk1245 said:

Yeah, stick you tongue into Putins bumhole, that will solve conflict. Hmmm, how that worked for USSR back in 1941?

Putin was alive in 1941?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, and then said:

Plans are being implemented that will greatly enlarge the Russian non-strategic nuclear stockpile. 

Is this really surprising given the west encroachment ever eastwards or Trump's claimed plans to bolster nuclear stockpiles and loosen rules of use.

"Among the new elements under consideration are a low-yield warhead for a ballistic missile intended primarily to deter Russia’s use of a small nuclear weapon in a war over the Baltic states; a sea-launched cruise missile; a change in language governing conditions in which the US would use nuclear weapons; and investments aimed at reducing the time it would take the US to prepare a nuclear test."

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/oct/29/trump-us-nuclear-weapons-arsenal

It seems to me that we are just entering another 'Arms Race'

Edited by RAyMO
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, RAyMO said:

Is this really surprising given the west encroachment ever eastwards or Trump's claimed plans to bolster nuclear stockpiles and loosen rules of use.

"Among the new elements under consideration are a low-yield warhead for a ballistic missile intended primarily to deter Russia’s use of a small nuclear weapon in a war over the Baltic states; a sea-launched cruise missile; a change in language governing conditions in which the US would use nuclear weapons; and investments aimed at reducing the time it would take the US to prepare a nuclear test."

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/oct/29/trump-us-nuclear-weapons-arsenal

It seems to me that we are just entering another 'Arms Race'

Those actions came in response to the development of these tactics by Russia and I agree, we are entering a new arms race.  A far more deadly attitude permeates the world today though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wouldn't really argue the point - but I would suggest encroachment came first.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, bmk1245 said:

OK, when was their last exercise in of tactical nukes?

Nukes? Where? When?

Yeah, stick you tongue into Putins bumhole, that will solve conflict. Hmmm, how that worked for USSR back in 1941?

Exercise Zapad 2017  - 14th September 2017 to 20th September 2017. Its no secret the Russian Military trains in the use of Tactical nukes as part of their strategy.

All that you require link provided.

https://www.nato.int/docu/review/2017/Also-in-2017/zapad-2017-and-euro-atlantic-security-military-exercise-strategic-russia/EN/index.htm

Video. Zapad 2017. (starting to look professional the Russian Military. lessons from the 2008 Georgian adventure well and truly learnt) 

Meanwhile on the Russian Border NATO respond. Its on a knife edge.

6dd23d2b-c2da-4446-9ce9-8196817d1c53.png

 

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, ExpandMyMind said:

Putin was alive in 1941?

Nope, his twin was. Starts  with Put, and ends with Ler.

Edited by bmk1245

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, stevewinn said:

Exercise Zapad 2017  - 14th September 2017 to 20th September 2017. Its no secret the Russian Military trains in the use of Tactical nukes as part of their strategy.

All that you require link provided.

https://www.nato.int/docu/review/2017/Also-in-2017/zapad-2017-and-euro-atlantic-security-military-exercise-strategic-russia/EN/index.htm

Video. Zapad 2017. (starting to look professional the Russian Military. lessons from the 2008 Georgian adventure well and truly learnt) 

Meanwhile on the Russian Border NATO respond. Its on a knife edge.

6dd23d2b-c2da-4446-9ce9-8196817d1c53.png

 

Doesn't that proves that Russia is a danger for its neighbors?

Anyway, strategic and tactical games are being played on both sides, whats your point?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, bmk1245 said:

Doesn't that proves that Russia is a danger for its neighbors?

Anyway, strategic and tactical games are being played on both sides, whats your point?

Point being i provided you with all the information you asked for and i wasted my time because there is no way you could have read what i provided in the short time its taken between replies and you ask what's the point exactly what is the point. End of reply to you.

Russia is responding to encroachment by the West. - The West should not have reneged on promised made at the collapse of the Soviet Union. The promises not to advance East. from 1991 Russia was Weak, the West took advantage and expanded up to the Russian Border. Then a monumental foreign policy by the EU to expand into Ukraine thinking the Russian Bear was still far to weak to respond. even if Russian was on its death bed it would have mustered the strengthen to react to such provocation.

Ukraine and Crimea where never going to be allowed to fall into Western Hands. - It was Western policy carefully followed throughout the Cold War. but the EU forgot all about that and whacked the Russian bear over the head and then started crying once the bear came storming towards them and here we are today. Russia securing its borders and NATO coming to the rescue of Europe. it cannot be overstated the absolute monumental cluster **** of a foreign policy blunder by the EU you know its a Western blunder by the way Crimea was simply left or allowed to fall into Russian hands. and now we have a classic Mexican stand-off. putting the lives of many NATO service personnel on the line and even worse putting the UK on the front bloody line. Russia has made no secret the UK would be the First country taken out by Nuclear strikes over the North Sea and Irish Sea knocking out our electrical grid and plunging the country into the ensuing chaos when the snowflakes cant get a mobile signal at that point we'd be knocked out of any war and sign a neutrality agreement. 

 

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, and then said:

It's your position that a first strike by Russia (in this instance) could be victorious because static missile locations could be saturated?  I'm not sure that I follow your reasoning.  Physics haven't changed and neither has the ability for either Russia or the U.S. to detect massed numbers of launches in time to retaliate.  The point of the thread was to ponder whether MAD is still accepted as being madness.  The fact that Russian war plans seem to be envisioning surgical nuclear strikes to eliminate "threats" against the Motherland - even if the Motherland's troops are in someone else's backyard - isn't about traditional doctrine.  THIS is a whole new level of crazy.  It lowers the threshold for global disaster and it seems to do so based on some very tenuous assumptions about the reactions that are expected from the U.S. and NATO.  

Good post. 

Quote

The point of the thread was to ponder whether MAD is still accepted as being madness.  The fact that Russian war plans seem to be envisioning surgical nuclear strikes to eliminate "threats" against the Motherland - even if the Motherland's troops are in someone else's backyard - isn't about traditional doctrine.  THIS is a whole new level of crazy. 

For any sane person, MAD must carry weight. Self preservation is hard wired in to our DNA. The question then becomes "are the leaders of today sane enough to recognize MAD?" Looking at the players on the chess board, lil' Kim seems the least stable individual. Putin is a killer, but a calculated one. He does not seem interested in throwing everything in to a fire.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An opportune time to revisit an old tune ...

~

 

[00.03:54]

 

~

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, stevewinn said:

Point being i provided you with all the information you asked for and i wasted my time because there is no way you could have read what i provided in the short time its taken between replies and you ask what's the point exactly what is the point. End of reply to you.[....]

Haven't occurred to you that I've already read that? Are you imagining yourself as some kind of sole info bringer? What a pompous schmuck.

4 minutes ago, stevewinn said:

[...]

Russia is responding to encroachment by the West. - The West should not have reneged on promised made at the collapse of the Soviet Union. The promises not to advance East. from 1991 Russia was Weak, the West took advantage and expanded up to the Russian Border. Then a monumental foreign policy by the EU to expand into Ukraine thinking the Russian Bear was still far to weak to respond. even if Russian was on its death bed it would have mustered the strengthen to react to such provocation.[...]

Any signed papers on "not to advance East"? Well, we have signed paper by Russia on Budapest treaty.

 

4 minutes ago, stevewinn said:

[...]

Ukraine and Crimea where never going to be allowed to fall into Western Hands. - It was Western policy carefully followed throughout the Cold War. but the EU forgot all about that and whacked the Russian bear over the head and then started crying once the bear came storming towards them and here we are today. Russia securing its borders and NATO coming to the rescue of Europe. it cannot be overstated the absolute monumental cluster **** of a foreign policy blunder by the EU you know its a Western blunder by the way Crimea was simply left or allowed to fall into Russian hands. and now we have a classic Mexican stand-off. putting the lives of many NATO service personnel on the line and even worse putting the UK on the front bloody line. Russia has made no secret the UK would be the First country taken out by Nuclear strikes over the North Sea and Irish Sea knocking out our electrical grid and plunging the country into the ensuing chaos when the snowflakes cant get a mobile signal at that point we'd be knocked out of any war and sign a neutrality agreement. 

 

The only one thing you got right is bolded one. West should had stopped imperialistic Russian thoughts right in 2008, when Russkies advanced on Georgia.

BTW, NATO knocking down Bosphorus would render Russian South fleet playing Marco-Polo in Black sea...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Dark_Grey said:

Good post. 

For any sane person, MAD must carry weight. Self preservation is hard wired in to our DNA. The question then becomes "are the leaders of today sane enough to recognize MAD?" Looking at the players on the chess board, lil' Kim seems the least stable individual. Putin is a killer, but a calculated one. He does not seem interested in throwing everything in to a fire.

times gone by nuclear weapons were a last result choice and threat, much like a goal keeper on the football pitch. as a result MAD lost its scary factor as no one could imagine anyone being nuts enough to use WMD to solve a problem. due to the rise of tough guy's Trump, Putin and crazy Kim who seem more intent on legitimising the use of nuclear weapons than showing moderation and diplomacy... resorting to threats, "surgical" and measured nuclear strikes to achieve foreign policy aims the world has entered a new era where the strong bully the weak and each other.

Edited by Captain Risky
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mutually Assured Destruction means if one goes 'pop' everybody goes 'boom'

Assuredly ...

~

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

It's clear that Russia will not tolerate European expansion into it's territory - like attempts in WW2 
when they ended up loosing around 27 million citizens - 

Rather than provoking Russia and sabre rattling it would be safer for everyone if the West accepted that  -
or face the consequences - I sincerely hope '''we''' don't make a serious miscalculation - I believe that Putin
and Russia wants Peace but won't allow invasion - 
 

 

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 5

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.