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.

 

Unstoppable - Russian next gen stealth hypersonic ramjet/scramjet cruise/anti-ship missiles.

page: 9
5
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 20 2007 @ 01:30 AM
link   
Ya can't go wrong with Newsmax and Wikipedia as credible sources of info.




posted on Apr, 20 2007 @ 08:14 PM
link   
vK, let's shut our bigoted little mouth for a moment.
Your facts and arguments are appreicated.
However, on a serious site, particularly on a forum-topic which has all-ready been marked for immaturity, you should control your words better, and gain a measure of verbal maturity.

On a purely logic-based argument: Doesn't it seem odd that every time we want to discuss the performance of Russian tanks, the response is always, 'Oh! Well! That situation doesn't count! Because it was all faked!'
So, clearly, while the U.S. tanks have had considerable success in recent years, there's not a single real example of Russian tanks at work?
That seems a bit shabby.
And saying only Russia has such things? Russia cannot even afford training, let alone 'truly advanced equipment.'
[For now.]

It all seems a bit silly.
It has the potential to be true, though still all rings of silliness.



posted on Apr, 20 2007 @ 08:32 PM
link   
i can't help but feel russia is gonna walk into the middle east when america is all but exausted.

they have the capability, the means and all the pros are there.
the cons, i'm not sure on though



posted on Apr, 20 2007 @ 10:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by spearhead
i can't help but feel russia is gonna walk into the middle east when america is all but exausted.

they have the capability, the means and all the pros are there.
the cons, i'm not sure on though

What? Whatever capability russia may have had went when the USSR collapsed. (stellar I know what your going to say, but your yelling into the wind).

The US while preoccupied in Iraq is far from exhausted. We have a superior air force with a superior navy that are on stand by and can go into attack mode at a moments notice. Not to mention our ground forces are vastly superior as well. A conventional war is americas bread and butter. Anyone who dares try to stand toe to toe will be crushed.



posted on Apr, 20 2007 @ 11:18 PM
link   
vk...


the american culture of self -arrogance and belief of invulnerability


You really shouldnt believe in everything you read... Especially on the internet. To me it seems that you are willing to believe in whatever appeals to you facts be damned.. The author of that article merely cherry-picked his way to his conclusion. Your "the american culture of self -arrogance and belief of invulnerability" writing leads me to believe that, that is the opinion of the article while you have more or less adopted it without proper research of your own to back it up. Thus making you seem a bit naive and anti american.

That source is a joke. Under the clinton administration (which has alot to do with that source.) did sale our country out to a degree to the likes of china. I believe he went as far as giving china american computer chips that went into making american nukes. However he compares americas 'presuit to happiness' to russia and chinas pursuit to 'hydrogen bombs'. And yet throughout all the 90's I believe the US military budget was never smaller then 275 billion dollars and that was the "officials figures"... Funny source... Perhaps we spend so much because we feel the need to overcompensate? Back to the source... The author has zero credibility. What more can be said? Dont bring a knife to a gun fight..


SURA ??? the american HAARP is rumoured to be based on SURA
and sura existed in 1981 , while HAARP came in 1991-1993
english.pravda.ru...
and reagan and keegan whined about monstrous soviet civil defence ,the plasma superweapon tested in saryashagan in 1979-1980 and ss-18 and soviets preparing for first strike, don't mind it but every nation whines over other's superiority ..


AHHH Rumors! Meaning it must be truth! Brilliant!

Have you ever heard the expression "never argue with and idiot..because the idiot will just bring you down to his level and beat you with experience"? body this isnt a pissing contest and we sure as hell are not comparing weeners.. But sense we have gone off topic already, these "weapons" are hypothetical at best. And if these hypothetical weapons are real, it would seem that america would be ahead of Russia in any case due to the sheer amount of $$$ that we could shell into such a program. Especially if we had thought that we were behind. But I hate discussing hypothetical scenarios especially with weapons. Lets try to not stray to far off topic. The only reason why I bothered to respond to your drivel was because of how ill informed it sounded.



what nonsense ???? russikies never made such claims , in fact gorby in 1990 admitted that soviet economy is weakening and it needs AID


Yes they did make such claims. One of which was about some nuclear powered bomber that they did not have. and another one was about a bomber fleet that they didnt have either. Deception and illusion became the soviets best defense against America. Your claim about gorby is correct, however it was an inevitable ending, sooner or later we would have found out. No sense in hiding what the world already knows... Pretty pointless if you ask me. Plus they needed the aid.


though in terms of economy i see China going to sooner or later take the economic power away


In your opinion? Possibly, but note that that probably wont be before 2030 and more then likely not before or after the technological singularity, which, as the article that im about to post states, would make the debate moot.
Why the US Will Still be the Only Superpower in 2030
futurist.typepad.com...

China has a long ways to go to be able to challenge the United States of America as "top dog".

now can we try and keep to the original posters topic? Feel free to U2U me if you want to continue.



[edit on 123030p://0504am by semperfoo]



posted on Apr, 21 2007 @ 04:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by Iblis

Your facts and arguments are appreicated.
However, on a serious site, particularly on a forum-topic which has all-ready been marked for immaturity, you should control your words better, and gain a measure of verbal maturity.

On a purely logic-based argument: Doesn't it seem odd that every time we want to discuss the performance of Russian tanks, the response is always, 'Oh! Well! That situation doesn't count! Because it was all faked!'
So, clearly, while the U.S. tanks have had considerable success in recent years, there's not a single real example of Russian tanks at work?
That seems a bit shabby.
And saying only Russia has such things? Russia cannot even afford training, let alone 'truly advanced equipment.'
[For now.]

It all seems a bit silly.
It has the potential to be true, though still all rings of silliness.





vK, let's shut our bigoted little mouth for a moment.

soo.. personal attacks now




you should control your words better, and gain a measure of verbal maturity

looking at who jumps to conclusions ,i know how muich maturity you have.




On a purely logic-based argument: Doesn't it seem odd that every time we want to discuss the performance of Russian tanks, the response is always, 'Oh! Well! That situation doesn't count! Because it was all faked!'


not at all, because russia exported extremely downgraded equipment to
third world countries , to fool western intelligience which was a standard practice in soviet army... though the soviet equipment in hands of india was succesful against the american equipment that pakistan had ..




years, there's not a single real example of Russian tanks at work?

well in the past 20 years you are right and i agree,but anyways you should read this on soviet k-5 dynamic cumulative armour (known in west as heavy ERA)developed for t-80u in 1984:



Kontakt-5 is a type of third-generation explosive reactive armour originating in the Soviet Union. It is the first type of ERA which is effectively able to defeat modern armour-piercing fin-stabilized discarding sabot (APFSDS) rounds.

Introduced on the T-80U tank in 1985, Kontakt-5 is made up of "bricks" of explosive sandwiched between two metal plates. The plates are arranged in such a way as to move sideways rapidly when the explosive detonates. This will force an incoming KE-penetrator or shaped charge jet to cut through more armour than the thickness of the plating itself, since "new" plating is constantly fed into the penetrating body. A KE-penetrator will also be subjected to powerful sideways forces, which might be large enough to cut the rod into two or more pieces. This will significantly reduce the penetrating capabilities of the penetrator, since the penetrating force will be dissipated over a larger volume of armour.


The effectiveness of Kontakt-5 ERA was confirmed by tests run by the German Bundeswehr and the US Army. The Germans confirmed that in tests, the K-5, mounted on older T-72 tanks, 'shattered' their 120mm DM-53 penetrators, and in the US, Jane's IDR's Pentagon correspondent Leland Ness confirmed that "When fitted to T-72 tanks, the 'heavy' ERA made them immune to the DU penetrators of M829 APFSDS, fired by the 120 mm guns of the US M1 Abrams tanks, which were among the most formidable tank gun projectiles at the time."

Newer KE penetrators like the US M829A2 and now M829A3, have been improved to defeat the armor design of Kontakt-5 (although Kontakt-5 has been improved as well; see T-84 and T-90) . The M829A2 was the immediate response, developed in part to take on the new armor bricks. The M829A3 is a further improvement of this as well and designed to fight future armor protection methods. As a response to M829A3 russian army produced new type of ERA, Relikt, most modern russian ERA, which is claimed to be twice as effective as Kontakt-5.

en.wikipedia.org...





So, clearly, while the U.S. tanks have had considerable success in recent years, there's not a single real example of Russian tanks at work?




well in the gulf war , there was considerble success but the iraqi opponent used steel penetrator which are incapable of pentrating chobham or k-5 ERA , and their lion of babylon(iraqi version of t-72) tanks were highly inferior to T-72B and did not have
K-5 ERA..
read more:



The Lion of Babylon tank (Asad Babil) was an Iraqi-built version of the Soviet T-72 MBT (main battle tank), assembled in a factory established in the 1980s near Taji, north of Baghdad.

en.wikipedia.org...





In the Persian Gulf War, the Iraqi tank units were heavily defeated, although this might have more to do with the poor training and full air supremacy than with any deficiencies of the T-72 itself. Furthermore, while facing the most modern Western tanks, the versions the Iraqi army fielded were out of date at the time. The Iraqi T-72s were downgraded export versions that had not been significantly upgraded over time and were firing inferior ammunition (often with steel penetrators and half-charges of propellant).
en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Apr, 21 2007 @ 05:13 AM
link   
You have voted iskander for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have one more vote left for this month.


At first I thought you were just talking about maybes and such, as there were no links, but you took care of that.

In light of these revelations, it sounds pretty safe to assume that our establishment already has these 'motherships' they're jus tnow talking about openly as "futuretech" stuff.



posted on Apr, 21 2007 @ 06:16 AM
link   


You really shouldnt believe in everything you read... Especially on the internet


well, then why should i believe america ...




The author of that article merely cherry-picked his way to his conclusion.


actually , though the author is a commie hater and a former DIA analyst jeffrey nyquist ... , he's correct , most americans are in a state of self delusion ....



Your "the american culture of self -arrogance and belief of invulnerability" writing leads me to believe that, that is the opinion of the article while you have more or less adopted it without proper research of your own to back it up. Thus making you seem a bit naive and anti american.

except for the fact that nyquist is a former DIA analyst and you are a young hyperpatriotic college student , I can tell who's naive ...



The author has zero credibility. What more can be said?

but more credibility than your idea that usa is invincible ... also he's a form



Dont bring a knife to a gun fight..

''if you use deception and cleverness a knife can help you win'', saying in india




. However he compares americas 'presuit to happiness' to russia and chinas pursuit to 'hydrogen bombs'. And yet throughout all the 90's I believe the US military budget was never smaller then 275 billion dollars and that was the "officials figures"...

and yet the US military cannot build monster underground cities like yamantau or uragan defence , yes i know america's conventional(the only superiority )




.. But sense we have gone off topic already, these "weapons" are hypothetical at best. And if these hypothetical weapons are real





AHHH Rumors! Meaning it must be truth! Brilliant!

aren't that HAARP being a weapon also rumors , read this:



It is a popular target of conspiracy theories, and though some have expressed fears of the HAARP being used as a nefarious weapon, most scientists involved in aeronomy, space science, or plasma physics reject these fears as unfounded.
en.wikipedia.org...




Russia owns and operates an ionospheric heater as powerful as the HAARP, called 'Sura,' which is located in central Russia, roughly 150 km from the city of Nizhny Novgorod.
en.wikipedia.org...





Have you ever heard the expression "never argue with and idiot..because the idiot will just bring you down to his level and beat you with experience"? body this isnt a pissing contest and we sure as hell are not comparing weeners

so you agree reagan was a weener ... good man




Yes they did make such claims. One of which was about some nuclear powered bomber that they did not have. and another one was about a bomber fleet that they didnt have either.

from what i know , american military got such reports from spies in iron curtain


Deception and illusion became the soviets best defense against America.

i will put it this way that illusion is america's way of life, and soviet best defence was deception for they always hide their true capabilites and are possibly if stellarX is correct preparing for the final war and the greatest war of all....

i must say StellarX has very good sources and he could be right , though i do not agree with him over that russia can currently win a nuke war against USA...



In your opinion? Possibly, but note that that probably wont be before 2030 and more then likely not before or after the technological singularity, which, as the article that im about to post states, would make the debate moot.

and thats your opinion , debate moot ????

that article ???? is it from IMF or major economist that it is absloute truth???
by the way , and yes US military is dependent on imperial dominance , and yes i was refering in terms of economy not military , yawn , lookin at how many countries are slowiliy shifting to euro and possibly to shift to yuan , and yes if you are aware that sooner or later in geopolitical terms means 10- 15 years ,understand
english.aljazeera.net...



China has a long ways to go to be able to challenge the United States of America as "top dog".

already usa is declining and i get to hear such nonsense ,
and yes USA is a waning superpower and this comes a person named professor and TFF director johan gultang who predicted in 1974-1976 that USSR will collapse with extreeme precision(he expected in 1990) :

www.transnational.org...

another one from a lesser known antiwar activist raimondo:
www.antiwar.com...



[edit on 21-4-2007 by vK_man]



posted on Apr, 21 2007 @ 06:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by semperfoo

Originally posted by spearhead
i can't help but feel russia is gonna walk into the middle east when america is all but exausted.

they have the capability, the means and all the pros are there.
the cons, i'm not sure on though

What? Whatever capability russia may have had went when the USSR collapsed. (stellar I know what your going to say, but your yelling into the wind).

The US while preoccupied in Iraq is far from exhausted. We have a superior air force with a superior navy that are on stand by and can go into attack mode at a moments notice. Not to mention our ground forces are vastly superior as well. A conventional war is americas bread and butter. Anyone who dares try to stand toe to toe will be crushed.


I agree. Just because Russia still has certain programs doest mean they have all out imperial dominating forces.

They fell seriously behind in the 90's, while our efforts kept on marching.

This years DOD budget is $530+BILLION... only $170B of it is estimated to go to the Iraq Occupation.

Another thing to consider is that laser weapons can / will-be-able-to outfox hysperspeed missiles. As this is all in the 'scifi' realm here, its just as safe to assume the US has fully operational laser/etc satellites.



posted on Apr, 21 2007 @ 06:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss


Another thing to consider is that laser weapons can / will-be-able-to outfox hysperspeed missiles. As this is all in the 'scifi' realm here, its just as safe to assume the US has fully operational laser/etc satellites.


a difficult task , and nearly impossible if the hypersoinc missiles have reflective coating or titanium armor or if the warhead spins



posted on Apr, 21 2007 @ 06:41 AM
link   
If they can shoot down 'tiny' artillery & mortar shells (they can), something much larger isn't much of a stretch.
www.st.northropgrumman.com...

Extending the characteristics of the missiles to including mirror / etc only drives up the cost for the poor Russians. I wont say that they cant have stuff like this or that, but to give them the credit of having endless forces of this stuff is stepping into paranioa unless they somehow have (had) a booming economy and such that the world has somehow had no idea about.

The distinction needs to be made that whatever 'cool stuff' they do have (I wont cut them short) in their case would be more in the scope of beng for actual defense purposes (from US especially), whereas US weapons and such are basically for offensive power projection. Just look at the difference in annual military spending.

I'll give that they'd be a force to be reconed with if we actually meant to attack them, but as far as them coming after US goes is another story.

[edit on 21-4-2007 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss]



posted on Apr, 21 2007 @ 06:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss

If they can shoot down 'tiny' artillery & mortar shells (they can), something much larger isn't much of a stretch.
www.st.northropgrumman.com...

[edit on 21-4-2007 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss]


except that tiny artillery or mortar , does not have armor and are extremely light, a fact , and if the missile has a reflective coating and titanium armor the missile will dissipate the concentrated energy of laser thus rendering it ineffective though it will be effective against subsonic missiles or missiles that lack armoring or reflective painiting .....



Extending the characteristics of the missiles to including mirror / etc only drives up the cost for the poor Russians.

the costs of reflective painting or heat resistance or laser resistant materials or as will not as heavy as increased energy and time requirements of the lasers to compensate for the energy loss and time loss , and will ensure the effectiveness of weapon

The laser damage coming from heat is a common misconception. Surprisingly it is the explosive effect that is destructive, not the melting/cutting. Look for it on wiki, maybe you can find some informations there
[edit on 21-4-2007 by vK_man]

[edit on 21-4-2007 by vK_man]



posted on Apr, 21 2007 @ 07:02 AM
link   
You know actually my bar of titanium is very reflective on one side.

When I first seen the Drudge Report mention the Russians testing their new evasive missile about a year ago I thought perhaps 'tiny' nukes or major conventional warheads could be placed in the anti-missiles so that they destroy the evasive missile with a pproximity detonation. In the time since I've seen reports of the US military wanting to experiment with new types of "tactical" nuclear warheads. Who knows.

Assuming these missiles we're talking about can be 'spotted', i wouldn't doubt the ships onboard anti-missle gatling guns (with their depleted uranium rounds) could take em down:


Google Video Link


It's all about combinations of things. That's the entire vision of the theater missile defense program in general.

[edit on 21-4-2007 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss]



posted on Apr, 21 2007 @ 07:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss


When I first seen the Drudge Report mention the Russians testing their new evasive missile about a year ago I thought perhaps 'tiny' nukes or major conventional warheads could be placed in the anti-missiles so that they destroy the evasive missile with a pproximity detonation. In the time since I've seen reports of the US military wanting to experiment with new types of "tactical" nuclear warheads. Who knows.

Assuming these missiles we're talking about can be 'spotted', i wouldn't doubt the ships onboard anti-missle gatling guns (with their depleted uranium rounds) could take em down:



[edit on 21-4-2007 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss]





When I first seen the Drudge Report mention the Russians testing their new evasive missile about a year ago I thought perhaps 'tiny' nukes or major conventional warheads could be placed in the anti-missiles so that they destroy the evasive missile with a pproximity detonation. In the time since I've seen reports of the US military wanting to experiment with new types of "tactical" nuclear warheads. Who knows.

excellent argument , even rumsfeld had spoken putting up sub- kiloton nukes on THAAD , for then it would extremely effective against ICBM...

even russia uses nukes on some of its s-300 's as said by stellar sources to intercept ICBM



posted on Apr, 21 2007 @ 01:39 PM
link   
For some reason, yesterday seemed like a good time to bring back the personal attacks for some members. I'm sick of editing posts and asking everyone to play nice. From here on out, its a red tag for that, no questions asked.

That being said, I'm glad to see that so far this has been a really good day for this thread. Let me encourage you all to keep up this recent trend of discussing the topic rather than other members.



posted on Apr, 21 2007 @ 01:52 PM
link   
We shall see. We shall see. How fast do these theoretical scramjets scramble. What's the time to lift off. Nest week.

Seriously though, I'm I supposed to think these things are layin' around in some hanger bay, right now. Waiting. Or are they like the Aurora, floating above is this very moment. Just waiting to Ram us into Oblivion.

I don't believe it. Sounds more like mind control. Wait, now I see. The "aliens" that they "brain-washed" are pilots, trying to get back home, right.

"JUST PUSH/BUTTON ONCE/TWICE" and you'll go home...That's what they kept tellin' 'em.



posted on Apr, 21 2007 @ 01:53 PM
link   
I might be guilty (but not in this thread if that's what you're talking about; I've mostly only seen the first and last pages of this whopper thread). Those "Shadoww" threads have been outta hand. I try to play nice, but in my view that character has been being a diservice to ATS and the other rational ATS'ers
, and it's like a comedy, so it's hard to not treat them a such.


OK, now I see it here!

[edit on 21-4-2007 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss]



posted on Apr, 21 2007 @ 03:02 PM
link   
a. No mirror. In existence. Can reflect a laser 100%.
The thought that a mirror always reflects a laser is quite an urban legend.

In the Military Analysis Network page listed below, note what is said
in the “Characteristics of materials” subtitle: “If light rays strike
a mirror, almost all of the energy incident on the mirror will be
reflected.” *Almost all*, but not really ALL of the energy is
reflected. It is possible if the laser beam has enough strength, some
of the energy may even penetrate the mirror and cause damage to the
missile. A laser is not only light, but also has some force and even
heat in it, so that force can shatter or melt the glass.

I also feel that a missile with mirrors all over would also be
unlikely, since a missile at launch and in flight is subject to
serious vibration and shock, which glass today certainly wouldn’t
stand up to. If you’re thinking of high stress glass like that of jet
cockpits, then there is the wear and tear of drag on the missile could
erode the mirror surfaces and reduce reflectivity. Of course the jet
cockpit has minimal glass and doesn’t go through the same stress as a
missile. Also, there is always one opening a mirror can’t cover in the
missile, which is the exhaust. A laser through there could knock out
the missile.

You might also note that some laser weapon systems use mirrors (mostly
ground-based and airborne laser systems). These mirrors are actually
meant for focusing the laser beam, probably since it loses power when
it travels in an atmosphere. They would also be definitely attuned to
the wavelength of the laser, so they wouldn’t break. These mirrors are
used mainly to correct deviations in the path of the laser. Using an
ordinary mirror as a laser though would be relegated to the realm of
fantasy. If shield mirrors would be used, they might have to be made
of an outlandish material that would also be very expensive.

Sources:
Military Analysis Network - Laser Fundamentals
www.fas.org...

A - SOL:LASER COUNTERMEASURES STUDY (11/30/95)
www.fbodaily.com...(November)/30-Nov-1995/Asol001.htm

Phun Physics - Laser light show Demonstration
phun.physics.virginia.edu...
- The laser here is different from what is used in satellite-based
laser weapon systems.

Homebuilt Lasers Page - Lasing Mechanisms
www.technology.niagarac.on.ca...

Links to documents on space lasers:
Space Based Laser concepts
210.79.226.16:81...

Laser Options for National Missile Defense
www.fas.org...

Space Based Laser profile
en.afit.edu...

A Brief History of the Missile Defense System
members.fortunecity.com...

Space.com - Space Laser project heats up
www.space.com...

Schedule for Airborne Laser testing
www.airbornelaser.com...



posted on Apr, 21 2007 @ 03:41 PM
link   
Well put, but I must admit that titanium can be polished to a near mirror finish that I know of first hand with the bar I keep in my toolbox, and I'd bet that they could polish it to a perfect mirror finish.

My bar is about 1.5" x .75" x 8". My stepdad gave it to me long ago; it was a mal-worked piece. The bottom side is very rough/dull looking, the .75" side edges have a slightly rippled surface from the milling tool and have the same dullness as the bottom, and then part of the very shiny surface has a streak down it that looks like the edge-SIDE of a diamond blade [the side of the blade where the edge is (.25")] spit it out somehow. It's sorta rippled like the side. BUT in anycase the surface that isn't affected by whatever happened to it is near mirror, and I don't think this was some MILSPEC part for what we're talking about. This is probably my most favorite item in my tool collection I must add
, I have no idea what a similar piece would cost but he said soemthing like $40-50 some 10 years ago if I remember correctly.


If the entire body of missile was made of mirror polished titanium it would be lightweight and theoretically immune from laser attack. It's likely they'd need the lightweight properties of titanium for such a high-speed 'craft' anyways, and if we can figure this out here I'm sure they've already thought of this.

That brings the cost of titanium into question, and if DARPA's titanium for $4 per pound works out, I'm sure the Russians would get ahold of the process.



Currently, four efforts aim to produce high-quality titanium at the program target of less than $4 per pound.
www.darpa.mil...


[edit on 21-4-2007 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss]



posted on Apr, 21 2007 @ 06:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by vK_man
well, then why should i believe america ...

You took what I wrote out of context.. And to be honest, I dont care if you believe in the US or not. I assure you though that it is infact real.





actually , though the author is a commie hater and a former DIA analyst jeffrey nyquist ... , he's correct , most americans are in a state of self delusion ....


Most americans have more important things to worry about...



except for the fact that nyquist is a former DIA analyst and you are a young hyperpatriotic college student , I can tell who's naive ...


IT'S HIS OPINION! He merely cherry picked his way to formulate his conclusion! It has no data backing, you took what he said and ran with it as if it were the bible, no questions asked on your part, making you sir, the naive person!



but more credibility than your idea that usa is invincible ... also he's a form


I never said the US was invincible, Just that it was much more powerful then any potential or current adversary out there.



''if you use deception and cleverness a knife can help you win'', saying in india


"Dont bring a knife to a gun fight" is a saying that we say in the states.

Guns must not be present in India, Or at the very least the full knowledge of how much more superior a weapon such as a gun is to a knife....



and yet the US military cannot build monster underground cities like yamantau or uragan defence , yes i know america's conventional(the only superiority )


You know what? I'm beginning to think all those nifty lil secrets the russians have are going to be well known by the US military brass since alls one needs to do is look them up on the internet.
(I wrote that laughing at you by the way!)

More hypothetical scenarios....
Pffft... The US has its own anti gravity spaceship fleet orbiting around the world!!!! [sarcasm]

Funny you mention that the US military "Cannot build underground cities". As if you somehow have evidence that states the contrary..

The US has been criticized as having underground bases especially in mountainous regions in parts of the US. I believe there were classified papers that were leaked on the internet a few years ago that validate these claims.

Heres a few sources I ran across that took me just a few seconds to find in regards to underground US military bases.

Deep Underground Military Bases and the Black Budget
www.subversiveelement.com...

DEEP UNDERGROUND MILITARY BASES IN AMERICA
www.geocities.com...

I really do hate talking about hypothetical scenarios, but that seems to be all that you know....



aren't that HAARP being a weapon also rumors , read this:


But love, im not a conspiracy theorist. I do believe that there are certain events that could be deemed a "conspiracy". However not in the extreme context that most ppl here seem to be under the mistaken delusion of wanting to believe.



so you agree reagan was a weener ... good man


A case of more cherry picking...


i will put it this way that illusion is america's way of life, and soviet best defence was deception for they always hide their true capabilites


So its an 'illusion' when the same is said about America but not when its applied to the soviet union? Thats sounds very hypocritical to me..


and are possibly if stellarX is correct preparing for the final war and the greatest war of all....


Wait... Hold on... The russians are aliens!! I knew it..I knew it!


i must say StellarX has very good sources and he could be right , though i do not agree with him over that russia can currently win a nuke war against USA...


Your an odd bird... The US invented the internet meaning we can shut it off to the rest of the world at a moments notice if we so wanted to (since we control it)... It would seem that to find out ones capabilities (in this case russias) alls one needs to do is look it up on the internet... Do you see how ridiculous that sounds? It doesnt appear to be so 'secret' after all. Do you understand what im trying to say?


that article ???? is it from IMF or major economist that it is absloute truth???


Its a well written article with well formulated, researched opinions based on economic data.


by the way , and yes US military is dependent on imperial dominance , and yes i was refering in terms of economy not military , yawn , lookin at how many countries are slowiliy shifting to euro and possibly to shift to yuan , and yes if you are aware that sooner or later in geopolitical terms means 10- 15 years ,understand


China will either become a full fledged democracy by 2010, or it will suffer from slower economic growth not much faster then the US. the two are exclusive so ones bound to happen. (China will be where america was in 1960 in the year 2010.)
And you post an Al jazeera website reference? The Dollar has been johnny on the spot for a long time.. The Euro doesnt have such a track record. Also with the CIA predicting the breakup of the EU within 15 years time the euros future isnt looking so hot to say in the very least.. Also all the retirees that will be expecting the government to take care of them in the EU will pretty much bankrupt the EU. Meanwhile the yuan is currently weaker then the dollar... Stop you cherry picking and look at the facts.



already usa is declining and i get to hear such nonsense ,
and yes USA is a waning superpower and this comes a person named professor and TFF director johan gultang who predicted in 1974-1976 that USSR will collapse with extreeme precision(he expected in 1990) :


the USSR collapse was imminent. It wasnt hard to predict. And Is the USA declining? Or are other nations getting richer thus closing the gap? Its nonsense really... People have been predicting the collapse of the US since its conception.

Really ppl like you shouldnt waste your life hopeing for something that more then likely wont happen in your life time. Live life to the fullest my friend, and stop wishing ill will because it will only consume you.

[edit on 063030p://4004pm by semperfoo]



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join