It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

10 Russian ICBM tests this year

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 6 2005 @ 09:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Disturbed Deliverer
I wouldn't argue that. I'm just kind of sick of Stealth Spy and all of these posts playing-up the Russian technology so he can make India look better...


WTF, how does this have anything to do with India at all ???

How did my post over hype russian tech ???

It just stated Russia is testing 10 ICBM's this year giving the dates and the respective missiles.

Besides, it is you who seems to be OVER -hypeing US tech, US superiority, and painting a picture of an invencible USA.

grow a brain.

if you are so sick of me, why don't you click on the IGNORE button, so that i can spray around some more filth about you, and you'll be unaware of it.




posted on Feb, 6 2005 @ 11:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by SiberianTiger
Russia has 39,000 THOUSAND Nukes U.S. has 25,000+ THOUSAND not 3000- 4000 the Mode 6 SS18 is a 20 Megatonn warhead


I think the 3000-4000 numbers are only the number of strategic ICBM nuclear missiles. Both sides have many more smaller tactical nuclear weapons.

Not sure about Russia but Im pretty sure the largest nuke right now in the US arsenal is the 9MT b9.

[edit on 6-2-2005 by ShadowXIX]



posted on Feb, 6 2005 @ 11:58 PM
link   
Stockpile numbers of all kinds of nuclear weapons is primarily based on the premise that official figures are correct. Sure they "say" they have cut down on them, dismantles, removed from service etc etc, but lets be realistic, national security (of any country) is not called "national security for nothing, they are hardly going to be honest and completely upfront about how many and what kind of weapons they really have in ready are they.
You dont spents years since cold war time and billions only to get rid of weapons because the other side says they have/will. cold war paranoia is not dead by any stretch.
Im betting the real figures are much higher than the official blurb.
Those who "play down" the effects of global thermonuclear war, imo, are fooling themselves into a false sense of security. That said , theres bugger all any of us can do about it anyway, but beleiving official figures because they are "official" is laughable.



posted on Feb, 7 2005 @ 03:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by Stealth Spy

Originally posted by Disturbed Deliverer
I wouldn't argue that. I'm just kind of sick of Stealth Spy and all of these posts playing-up the Russian technology so he can make India look better...



Even if stealth Spy does the hype what’s the harm? The WHOLE International Media, Hollywood is Full of American Hype...Hype about a country that cant even produce her own brains and goes on hiring foreign brains....basically US don’t have an Indigenous Aircraft of its own ....only has hired brains who design it for the US...



posted on Feb, 7 2005 @ 08:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by ShadowXIX


I can tell you major cities are hit more then once, also Russia has a second wave of Bio weapons that come over after the nukes. When Russia dreamed up doomsday they didnt fall short. Nuclear war is all out you dont save your bio and chemical weapons.



Correct, they filled some SS-18 warheads with powdered Alibek Anthrax. This was apparently more bang for the buck than a nuclear warhead.



posted on Feb, 11 2005 @ 12:31 PM
link   
I think your numbers of nuclear weapons are innacurate, and dated. The Russians and Americans now both have under 10.000 each at most.

www.thebulletin.org...

www.thebulletin.org...

And as far as any Biological weapons as part of the Russian SIOP, I suspect that it would be humanitarian to do so. Americans would die quickly, while Russians would die only slightly less quiclky. Question is, does it matter? Do you want to find out?

So who's wang is longer, and who's daddy can beat up your daddy? Who cares, because war at that level is suicide.
Great Britian has enough nuclear firepower to level any country, at a fraction of the Russians or American stockpiles. Maybe they are the smart one's.

[edit on 11-2-2005 by Cowboy]



posted on Feb, 11 2005 @ 02:28 PM
link   
England only has aroud 100 Nukes wow, unless they've been building after the cold war.



posted on Feb, 11 2005 @ 09:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by SiberianTiger
England only has aroud 100 Nukes wow, unless they've been building after the cold war.


They have more than that, always have. Where do you get your figures from, you always seem to be way off.



posted on Feb, 12 2005 @ 01:09 AM
link   
I think the UK has around 392 nuclear weapons. Hitting 392 of a countries cities with nukes would make any country think twice about attacking the UK no matter how big they are.

Thats a pretty nice deternt if you ask me



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join