End all be all...Russia's Status as a Super Power

Originally posted by centurion1211
I knew I wouldn't have long to wait before you started insulting me.

Considering how deserving you are it would have been unfair to everyone here to put if off any longer.

That's just your standard operating procedure when someone (anyone) has a different view from yours.

Only when their desperately ignorant and do not really contest any of the main tenants of my arguments while claiming they are; somehow.

You claim to want a discussion? Well, you won't get one with your "my way or the highway" attitudes.

Hardly possible with someone who is not familiar with the subject matter they have chosen to engage themselves in. How am i supposed to hold a discussion when those who disagree with what i have presented yet do not provide any reason for their views beside what they believe based on their perception of what happened?

Get over the soviet union, get over russia, but most of all get over yourself and your

I don't care about either but that will hardly make the threat they pose 'go away'.

condescending attitude towards those that don't share your "insights".

Since you are not well informed by treatment of you is quite fair considering your arrogance in assuming you know something when you so clearly have not the start of a accurate idea on this matter. My 'insights' are hardly relevant when you have not bothered to dispute the evidence i have presented in such large volumes. You do not have to dispute it ALL but you should at least have tried if just to prove that you have in fact read some of it.

The title of this thread includes the words "end all be all". We can only hope that this thread does turn out to be the last of a dying breed of threads longing for the by gone days of soviet "greatness" .

I don't agree with the author's wording and i hardly consider any country 'great' when it's average citizens are living the way many Russians are forced to. I don't think there is anything in what i have typed up on ATS that glorifies , or attempts to , the USSR or what it had in mind for it's citizens. If you managed to come to such a conclusions i doubt you read any of my post's on ATS.

Because otherwise we'll have to wait at least another generation before everyone that still dreams of the time when the old soviet union was powerful is finally gone.

Well the sad reality is it only reformed, never really left and retains control over very much if not all of what the USSR did. By looking at the weaponry in the hands of the nations that are still being led by old KGB/FSB or 'communist' leaders one would have to be quite stupid or ignorant not to have any worries about what is happening in the US and elsewhere.

Originally posted by centurion1211
Back on topic.

As to relative stengths and "super power" status, I think we shoould also look at space programs. If any have to ask why, the answer is that a space program drives the invention and development of new technologies. Some of these technologies will, of course, have military adaptations.
Now anyone who has studied history knows that the soviets where the first to launch a satellite and the first to put a man in space, and I'll give you the first to build a space station.

Here is a list for who did what when.

en.wikipedia.org...

en.wikipedia.org...

Out of view, but no less real a competition, the drive to develop space for military uses paralleled scientific efforts. Well before the launch of Sputnik 1, both the US and the USSR started developing plans for reconnaissance satellites. The Soviet Zenit spacecraft, which by the dual-use designed in by Korolev eventually became Vostok, began as a photoimaging satellite. It competed with the US Air Force's Discoverer series. Discoverer XIII provided the first payload recovered from space in August 1960 - one day ahead of the first Soviet recovered payload.

Both the US and USSR developed major military space programs, often following a pattern whereby the US only completed a mockup before its program ended, while the USSR built, or even orbited, theirs:

1. Supersonic Intercontinental Cruise Missile: Navaho (test program stopped) vs. Buran cruise missile (plan)
2. Small Winged Spacecraft: X-20 Dyna-Soar (mockup) vs. MiG-105 (flight-tested)
3. Satellite Inspection Capsule: Blue Gemini (mockup) vs. Soyuz interceptor (plan)
4. Military Space Station: MOL (plan) vs. Almaz (flown somewhat modified as Salyut 2, 3, and 5)
5. Military Capsule with hatch in heat shield: Gemini B (tested crewless in space) vs. VA TKS, also known as Merkur space capsule (flown crewless as part of TKS)
6. Ferry to Military Space Station: Gemini Ferry (plan) vs. TKS (flown crewless in space, and docked with a Salyut)

en.wikipedia.org...

But since then, maybe into the 80's, what have they done.

NASA's press release trumpeted the safety of the new system compared to the shuttle. Now, after years of pretending that the shuttle had a loss rate of 1 in 100,000 or higher, NASA suddenly fessed up that the safety factor was only 1 in 200. In fact, it was probably under 1 in 100, and this was achieved only at tremendous cost. A huge labour force had to exhaustively check out each shuttle prior to launch, but the system still averaged over one delayed or aborted launch for each time it got into the air. The entire system was stood down for nearly three years after each major failure. Minor delays added up to over four years all by themselves.

The press release completely obscured the fact that the 'new safety' is not due to any new technology or fundamental change - but only the addition of a launch escape system. To America's shame, the Shuttle was the only manned spacecraft ever to fly without a method of rescuing the crew in case of failure of the primary vehicle (except the Soviet Voskhod, which flew only twice, and had no method of escape only during the first 47 seconds of fight). American fighter pilots, with a chance of only 1 per 30,000 missions of losing their aircraft in peacetime, are given an ejection seat or crew capsule for escape. To give American astronauts no such escape provisions in a vehicle 300 times more dangerous was and is criminal.

NASA was able to hide the awful secrets of the Shuttle's horrendous operating costs and unreliability until the Challenger disaster killed seven. American access to space was nearly severed. It was revealed that the United States was on the brink of losing its capability to launch any payloads in space at all any more. The shuttle was actually more costly, less reliable, and, due to fears of the safety of the crew aboard, much less operationally responsive than expendable vehicles. The situation was saved just in time - the production lines for Delta, Atlas, and Titan launchers were within months of being shut down forever. The US Air Force was released from its obligation to use the shuttle, and expendable launch vehicles were put back into production. The shuttle was reimagined as a high-cost government program, dedicated solely to supporting (while actually parasitically sucking the blood from) another senseless high-cost government pork program, the
Space Station Freedom aka Space Station Fred aka the International Space Station.

www.mercurians.org...

Reginald Turnill, editor of the London-based publication Jane's Spaceflight Directory, said the Soviets were so far
ahead in space that "they are almost out of sight."

SDI will be hurt by the problems afflicting the space program as a whole, such as the series of seven explosions of normally reliable boosters since August of 1985 (Nike Orion previously had 120 straight successes; the Delta, 43; the shuttle, 24) The Soviets now
have an unequivocal lead in space ventures, according to John Lewis of the University of
Arizona (presentation before the UN Association of Tucson).

www.oism.org...

On Sept. 29 and 30, the Soviets practiced bombing Hawaii.
They also zapped three American airplanes with lasers. The
pilots were not seriously injured, but most of the electronic
surveillance equipment on one plane was knocked out
instantly. For several hours, Mikhail Gorbachev and a number
of other top Soviet officials occupied the deep underground
bunkers near MOSCOW, according to US intelligence sources
(Washington ZTmes, Oct. 13, 1987 Al). But they did not need
such a huge protection factor. The US government responded
with a protest, and with optimism about the upcoming summit.
A few Hawaiian citizens called their Director of Civil Defense
to ask where the shelters were, and had to be informed that
actually there aren't any (personal communication, War Crisis
Workshop, Ark. Department of Emergency Services, Nov. 4).

www.oism.org...

One problem is limitations in
satellite verification capability. Only two advanced
photoreconnaissance satellites (called KH-11) are now in orbit,
possibly about half the bare minimum needed. One is long
past its design life. A replacement was reportedly destroyed in
the Challenger explosion (Washington Inquirer Aug 12,1988).
In an 18-month period, there were five satellite launch failures.
In satellites for surveillance and defense, the USSR is
said to have a tenfold advantage. When trouble flares, the
Soviets frequently launch one or more surveillance satellites
within days, while it takes the US at least six weeks to plan a
new space flight. Development of Soviet antisatellite weapons
continue. Space-based lasers may be deployed in the 199Os,
and ground-based lasers may be capable of blinding US
satellites in low earth orbit even now (Wall St July 12,1988).

www.oism.org...

Continued

The Soviet response was immediate. Yuri Andropov ordered additional funding and implementation of Fon-2. At the same time Soviet diplomatic initiatives were undertaken. A proposal was made to the Unite States to ban all space-based weapons. Andropov declared a unilateral moratorium on testing of the improved IS-MU ASAT. As a 'warning shot' the Terra-3 complex was used to track the STS-41-G space shuttle Challenger with a low power laser on 10 October 1984. This caused malfunction of on-board equipment and temporary blinding of the crew, leading to a US diplomatic protest.

www.astronautix.com...

Manned seven crew. Deployed ERBS; performed high resolution Earth imagery. Payloads: Earth Radiation Budget Satellite (ERBS) deployment, Office of Space and Terrestrial Applications (OSTA)-3 experiments, Large Format Camera (LFC). First use of Orbital Refueling System (ORS) with extravehicular activity (EVA) astronauts, IMAX camera. In response to the American Strategic Defence Initiative and continued military use of the shuttle, the Soviet Union fired a 'warning shot' from the Terra-3 laser complex at Sary Shagan. The facility tracked Challenger with a low power laser on 10 October 1984. This caused malfunctions to on-board equipment and discomfort / temporary blinding of the crew, leading to a US diplomatic protest.

www.astronautix.com...

One approach is "parasite satellites"--orbiting limpet bombs that attach themselves to enemy craft for detonation at a later date. The Chinese say they can do this already, though the claim is hard to verify. A simpler method is to disable your enemy with a high-speed projectile. In other words, shoot at it. This was tried in 1974 when the Soviet Union launched Salyut 3, the first crewed military reconnaissance outpost in orbit. In anticipation of an attack by the US, the Soviets mounted a modified machine gun on the satellite so they could greet any hostile approach with a hail of bullets. The attack never came. Salyut 3 proved to be a white elephant and was quickly decommissioned, although not without a shot being fired. After the two-man crew had left, the ground crew fired a few rounds by remote control. It must have been quite a sight.

Particle-beam weapons inflict damage in a similar way. They emit beams of particles, perhaps hydrogen or deuterium ions, at near-light speed. Details remain sketchy, but the principle is essentially the same as in an ion-propulsion system (New Scientist, 21 November 1998, p 22). A working particle beam is believed to have been on board the mysterious Soviet "battlestar" Polyus-Skif, which was launched in May 1987 but crashed during take-off. Polyus-Skif also carried a prototype laser for destroying satellites. In the US, research on particle-beam weapons continues at the High Energy Research and Technology Facility on Kirtland Air Force Base, New Mexico.

www.jamesoberg.com...

So they were not doing much in the eigties, right?

Since the fall of the soviet union, what has russia done in space?

What do you need to do in space when you can ensure that anything that is in space will be unlikely to stay there for every long?

[FBIS Translated Text] The press reported in very considerable detail on the April 1993 meeting of the presidents of the USA and Russia in Vancouver. But one thing remains not entirely clear: Had Boris Yeltsin proposed to his American friend the idea of carrying out the major experiment "Doveriye" ("Trust") in the vicinity of Kwajelein Atoll, initiating a joint effort to create a global antimissile defense system. It was not until summer of that year that 21ST CENTURY SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, the well-informed journal of the American military-industrial complex, finally informed us that there had in fact been a conversation on this topic between the presidents. What did the politicians talk about? What kind of experiment is this?

For practical purposes plasma weapons have already been created in Russia. Their action is based on focusing beams of electromagnetic energy produced by laser or microwave radiation into the upper layers of the atmosphere. These beams would be able to defeat any target flying at supersonic or near-sonic speeds in the near future. A cloud of highly ionized air arises at the focus of the laser or microwave rays, at an altitude of up to 50 kilometers. Upon entering it, any object--a missile, an airplane, is deflected from its trajectory and disintegrates in response to the fantastic overloads arising due to the abrupt pressure difference between the surface and interior of the flying body. What is fundamental in this case is that the energy aimed by the terrestrial components of the plasma weapon--lasers and antennas--is concentrated not at the target itself but a little ahead of it. Rather than "incinerating" the missile or airplane, it "bumps" it out of trajectory.

According to dependable information our scientific proving ground has already conducted tests in which a projectile flying through plasma discharges was deflected from its normal trajectory and self-destructed.

www.globalsecurity.org...

According to the Hong Kong media, in June 2000 the Chinese military was developing sophisticated laser artillery (also known as "death ray" artillery). It was listed in China's "1998 National Security System Project," adopted by Jiang Zemin in 1999.

The PLA successfully tested laser artillery – for the second time – in intercepting low-flying missiles in the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau in early June 2000. This laser weapon could significantly upgrade the anti-aircraft and anti-missile capability of, particularly, the PLA navy. Reportedly, new tests of "laser artillery" took place in 2001.

It should be emphasized that China received from Russia much of its laser technology, both for civilian and military use, from 1992 to 1998. And in June 1999, in Moscow, Col.-Gen. Zhang Wannian concluded agreements on joint laser-weapons development.

www.newsmax.com...

Threatening U.S. Satellites. The Soviets could also use as ASAT systems their Galosh Anti-Ballistic Missile and other modified ballistic missiles besides the SS-9. These missiles could carry conventional or nuclear warheads. Moscow is also developing ground-based lasers, such as the massive Soviet laser facility under construction at Dushanbe, and space-based ASAT systems, including lasers. All of these systems could threaten U.S. satellites.

These ASAT systems are part of the massive Soviet Red Shield strategic defense program which, as Mikhail Gorbachev has admitted, is being energetically pursued. This Red Shield program is significantly larger than the congressionally constrained U.S. SDI program and includes deployed systems such as ASATs, while SDI remains a research program.

The failure of the anti-satellite (ASAT) negotiations dur ing the Carter Administration is in large part attributable to a fundamental discrepancy: the USSR possessed a demonstrable if limited capacity to intercept and destroy some low-orbit US satellites, while the United States did not possess a capacity to do the same to corresponding Soviet systems. US officials were largely uninterested in an accord that would preserve the Soviet advantage: Soviet officials were uninterested in an accord that would eliminate their advantage.

Such an accord would also fail to prevent Soviet development of improved versions of this system and of new types of ASAT systems,.such as lasers, because Moscow could evade any limits on their development. The idea of an ASAT ban thus is not only a nonsense, but a dangerous nonsense.

www.heritage.org...

The Soviets built high-energy laser devices in the 1980s and generally placed more emphasis on the weapons applications of lasers than did the West. The tactical laser program had progressed to the point that by the mid-1980s, U.S. analysts anticipated that laser weapons would be deployed with future Soviet forces.

www.dia.mil...

LEAD: Soviet Laser Threat Seen The Soviet Union has developed lasers capable of destroying low-orbiting United States satellites, an Air Force general said. Page 62.

query.nytimes.com...

In 1983 flight trials of the approximately 60t laser device commenced on an Ilyushin Il-76MD heavylift transport. At the same time research was being carried out on the propagation of laser beams in the atmosphere.

Starting at the end of the 1960s, the Russians also developed ground-based nuclear laser systems for combating spacecraft. Unlike the American x-ray lasers, they could be used several times over. The programme was terminated after the USSR announced a unilateral moratorium on trials of the space defence system and the puzzling deaths of the two project managers in the mid-1980s.

The mobile Pamir-SU electro-generator, with an output of 15MW and a mass of around 20t, could supply power to long-range lasers and ultra-high-frequency weapon systems. It could be used both on the Earth and also in space. In 1994/1995 this equipment was sold to the USA.

www.flug-revue.rotor.com...

Continued

One potential method might be a powerfull ground-based laser (why was the infrared sensor on one of our satellites suddenly blinded as it passed over the USSR?) A laser on the Mir space station recently "illuminated" an ICBM during the cruise phase of its flight in space, demonstrating Soviet ability to detect and track a missile, according t o Pentagon sources (Washington Inquirer , July 24, 1987).

The purpose of Mir may indeed include bringing about "peace" -- Soviet style,
implies absence of opposition.

www.oism.org...

Oh, I remember. The russians produced a couple of technologically inferior modules for the ISS that the

I am sure you can prove that

U.S. had to send them money so they could be finished late.

If you can force someone else to pay for something you will get credit for....

And their space shuttle - the buran today - sits unprotected from the weather in a pit.

Which is where the Shuttle belongs.

Second and, to paraphrase Dr. George Mueller at a NASA history conference held in Washington in recent years, we “got the shuttle we have today from the ‘Bureau of the Budget Design Bureau’” that NASA did not want and that was not cheaper than Saturn 5.

www.space.com...

Could have had Walmarts on the Moon i tell you!

www.transterrestrial.com...

And the possibly cheaper alternatives or general disagreements which then turn into almost agreement...

www.space.com...

selenianboondocks.blogspot.com...

It's seems to be quite a waste and i am still trying to discover what type of payloads the USSR could not find a alternative way to get into orbit...

One look at the buran's familiar shape and it's obvious that the buran is not a "russian design". Let's now contrast that to the U.S. Once the U.S. was awkened to the space race challenge, it "zoomed" by the soviets back in the 60's and has never looked back with moon landings and mars landers and many other planetary probes. There's even one on the way to Pluto now.

If you can buy or steal designs because you have agents at every level of your enemies intelligence and defense infrastructure it's kinda stupid to redesign something when it would do the singular job you have in mind for it. As for the rest your ignorance of Soviet achievements in space is quite complete if that's what you really believe. I am not suggesting that they managed it on their own ( i believe they were given much of resources and knowledge by collaborators in the US) but that they did do so much first and in a simply far larger scale.

So, my point is this. On the one hand you have a country (U.S.) that is leading the world and continuing to break new ground.

In some areas and i am quite sure that if not for the policies of the US government and science community in could in fact be as you claim. The US is certain still a world leader but not in my opinion the one that reacts to the moves of Russia.

While on the other hand, you have russia, who has basically given up even trying to compete, while their technologocal infrastructure rusts away and their technological people move away to other countries.

How can you say they have given up when they now simply wield weapons which the US seems unable to defend against in any proper fashion?

"Q: Let me ask you specifically about last week's scare here in Washington, and what we might have learned from how prepared we are to deal with that (inaudible), at B'nai Brith.

A: Well, it points out the nature of the threat. It turned out to be a false threat under the circumstances. But as we've learned in the intelligence community, we had something called -- and we have James Woolsey here to perhaps even address this question about phantom moles. The mere fear that there is a mole within an agency can set off a chain reaction and a hunt for that particular mole which can paralyze the agency for weeks and months and years even, in a search. The same thing is true about just the false scare of a threat of using some kind of a chemical weapon or a biological one. There are some reports, for example, that some countries have been trying to construct something like an Ebola Virus, and that would be a very dangerous phenomenon, to say the least. Alvin Toeffler has written about this in terms of some scientists in their laboratories trying to devise certain types of pathogens that would be ethnic specific so that they could just eliminate certain ethnic groups and races; and others are designing some sort of engineering, some sort of insects that can destroy specific crops. Others are engaging even in an eco- type of terrorism whereby they can alter the climate, set off earthquakes, volcanoes remotely through the use of electromagnetic waves."

So there are plenty of ingenious minds out there that are at work finding ways in which they can wreak terror upon other nations. It's real, and that's the reason why we have to intensify our efforts, and that's why this is so important.

DoD News Briefing
Secretary of Defense William S. Cohen

Who are those 'others' that can do these things on a world scale without suffering retribution from the so called superior US strategic forces?

NEWS BRIEF: "Malaysia to Battle Smog With Cyclones"
by Chen May Yee,
Staff Reporter of the Wall Street Journal
Thursday, November 13, 1997, page A19.

"KULA LUMPUR -- Malaysia's war on smog is about to get a new twist. The government wants to create man-made cyclones to scrub away the haze that has plagued Malaysia since July. 'We will use special technology to create an artificial cyclone to clean the air', said Datuk Law Hieng Ding, minister for science, technology and the environment. The plan calls for the use of new Russian technology to create cyclones -- the giant storms also known as typhoons and hurricanes -- to cause torrential rains, washing the smoke out of the air. The Malaysian cabinet and the finance minister have approved the plan, Datuk Law said. A Malaysian company, BioCure Sdn. Bhd., will sign a memorandum of understanding soon with a government-owned Russian party to produce the cyclone."

"Datuk Law declined to disclose the size of the cyclone to be generated, or the mechanism. 'The details I don't have', he said. He did say, though, that the cyclone generated would be 'quite strong'. Datuk Law also declined to disclose the price of creating the cyclone. But, he said, Malaysia doesn't have to pay if the project doesn't work."

WSJ-Malaysia to Battle Smog With Cyclones

Those who doubt that Katrina, or any other hurricane, could be stopped—or created—can find substantiation in a long-forgotten article by Chen May Yee in the Nov. 13, 1997, issue of The Wall Street Journal.

The article recounts an offer by the Russians to aid Malaysia to create a typhoon to dissipate a pall of smoke that hung over the country—and still does—caused by the burning of large sections of the rain forests in Indonesia and Sumatra.

To quote from the article: Datuk Law Hieng Ding, Malaysia’s minister for science, technology and the environment at the time, said his country “would use special technology to create an artificial cyclone to clean the air.”

The article went on to say that a Malaysian company, BicCure Sdn. Bhd., would sign a memorandum of understanding with a government-owned Russian company to create a cyclone that would cause torrential rains and thus cleanse the air over Malaysia of the smoke and ash.

www.americanfreepress.net...

Malaysia is to use Russian rain-making equipment to clear the haze which has covered parts of south-east Asia for many months.

The rain machine is designed to produce high winds, creating the conditions which cause clouds and rain. The Russians say the winds will not damage property or the environment - and the Malaysian authorities will only have to pay if the rain machine works.

Russia has a long record of attempts to control climate. The latest, in September of this year, involved Moscow's mayor, Yuri Luzhkov. He paid the equivalent of £500,000 to stop rain falling during the day of the capital's 850th anniversary celebrations.

The rain held off, but scientists say it is impossible to assess if the mayor got value for money, or was just lucky, without detailed measurements.

BBC-Malaysia calls in Russian rainmakers

[edit on 22-1-2007 by StellarX]

Continued

The director of the Russian geophysical observatory of the Russian Meteorological Service, A.Voyeikov, says that the process of making a weather forecast for Russia, the USA, Europe and Canada is much more complicated in comparison with other states. "Atmospheric processes are not stable on these territories, and cyclones may occur absolutely incidentally," Voyeikov said."

Modern technologies unable to predict weather changes

American meteorologists are not the only ones who blame the neighbors for using the "hurricane gun." Unconfirmed and patchy reports on questionable experiments with weather conducted by the U.S. and Soviet Union stirred up a number of political scandals in many countries of the world. Following a large-scale flooding in Europe in 2002, some European politicians put the blame on the "U.S. military" for disrupting EU economy. In 2002, Committee for Defense of the Russian Duma raised the issue about a detrimental impact on climate caused by experiments involving disturbance of the earth's ionosphere and magnetosphere. The deputies focused their attention on HAARP system that is still under construction in Alaska.

USA and Russia supposedly develop secret meteorological weapons.

Worried yet?

If and until the current situation in russia can be changed, then IMO these 'russia wannabe a super power again' threads are meaningless.

If you don't know much about anything related to this subject matter that is most certainly the conclusions one would come to and i would not hold it against you if you were not so damn arrogant.

Originally posted by centurion1211
Regarding your "admiration" of stellarx's writings, a key point. Quantity of writing certainly does not equate to quality of writing.

Agreed but i believe i offer both while you have neither working in your favour.

Case in point. It's easy to find some nut case on a park bench that will talk your ear off for hours - without them saying anything that makes sense at all.

That's why i don't go to parks.

American people's responses are often short and to the point.

That's a very nice way of saying that content is normally sorely lacking.

After all, we're not trying to get a good grade on a term paper, we're just trying to get our point across with the least amount of typing possible.

It's always to make short 'to the point arguments' when you are defending a consensus based on widely accepted perceptions of reality. Why people think that is any indication of merit is quite beyond me....

So, just because post runs on for over a full screen or more of BS does not make it better than a 2 or 3 liner containing the truth.

It may not make it better but in my case much of that space is devoted to the sources i base my views on and hopefully a few individuals will better informed for knowing what they did not before.

I don't want people to believe my opinions or conclusions but those who want to pretend that i am not on the whole dealing with factually accurate source material are going to have to do more than just accuse me of typing 'bs' to silence me.

Stellar

LOL, I see stellar is still using the same sources for soviet superweapons that I proved completely misleading and in some cases completely false.

What a shame he hasn't learnt his lesson.

EDIT:

Originally posted by rogue1
LOL, I see stellar is still using the same sources for soviet superweapons that I proved completely misleading and in some cases completely false.

What a shame he hasn't learnt his lesson.

Just provide the 'audience' ( you wish; i hope ) your pandering to some links or have you found that you pander to the type that does not require actual evidence for claims?

Originally posted by rogue1
Agreed 100%. Once more stellars sources are suspect at best

Which sources are suspect and what source material do you base your opinion on?

and his conclusions are even worse.

Without presenting sourced material as to why you are disagreeing with my sources or my conclusions , what good is your opinions really?

He just flogs the same dead horse over and over again. I think he perscribes to Goebels propaganda strategy, the bigger the lie the more blievable it is.

Well i don't know who really believes it and i have no gun to any one's head or for that matter slave labour camps or the Russian front by which means to get rid of the 'dissidents'. I do think many of the true rulers of the world employs this strategy but i hardly have their tools or motives so it should be relatively easy to 'expose' me if such was so easily done.

However he didnt count on so many people showing him up all the time and completely disproving his conclusions.

Where?

I for one wish to stick to a conversation based in reality, so I hvae chosen to ignore him.

You for one choose to propagandize and shout down anyone (mostly without sources or on the side of reality) who happens to disagree with your vapid propaganda fed perception of the world and the more they attempt to show why they believe what they do, with the best means possible, the more vapid and slanderous your accusations against them. You are only interested in the 'realities' that suits your particular self serving agenda,

He just posts the same stuff over and over again, It's been disproven once ( and many more times by other members ) no point ging over the same ground.

Just put up some links as such should be easy to find if it happens anywhere near as often as you suggest. Once again i do not believe everything i have posted MUST be true ( there is no way for me to verify some of the claims and i trust that the scientist or secretary of defense in question were not lying based on what i already know) but if you want to call it a lie you must at least be able to present sources which i a logical and verifiable fashion attacks or disproves the claims made. On occasion you have presented information that disputes the claims made in my sourced material but you rarely if ever seem to interested or able to continue the discussion after your counter claims were addressed with additional sources reinforcing the original 'facts'.

I do my best to make my view of the world internally consistent and if yours is based on the type of vapid propaganda that so quickly fails under closer inspection you should be the one to reevaluate your views considering how reality treated them in the past.

Stellar


[edit on 23-1-2007 by StellarX]

Mods, please close this thread. All this guy (stellarx) is doing is posting lengthy rehashes of other threads and personally insulting any members that disagree with him.

[edit on 1/23/2007 by centurion1211]

i agree, russia is not even a superpower anymore and alot of the crap stellar posts is outdated information, russia does not have the money to fund such expensive projects anymore and if they did they would be projecting development and working with other countries like the USA does with its DEW technology.

whats sad is stellar believes one can actually win a nuclear war, that alone is an admission of insanity.





[edit on 23-1-2007 by ape]

I also think this thread should be closed. Stellar, well I am sure he has slammed me a few times, but I wouldn't know. That "Ignore" button under his name seems appropriate to push for his ilk. Still, the Mods should ban him as far as I am concerned. The personal attacks are totally out of line.

Yes agreed with the above 3 posters, stellar is just wasting server space with his hige discredited cut and pastes. I think ( and this isn't meant to be an insult, just an observation ) that he is slightly delusional.
There was a time where he'd almost beg me for my approval of his posts. I began by showng him what was incorrect with his information, almost straight away he started to attack me personally on teh board and in chat.
I must admit, I gave him many of the links about Russian super weapons with the caveat that it was mostly disinformation from the Cold War, but didn't think he would take it so literally. I also ( a mistake in hindsight ) pointe him to informtion on P2P file sharing about sca;ar weapns and weather engineering. I didn't know back then that he's have a hard tme distinguishing fact from fiction.

Wow, guys. Now you're not only running out of sources, but even out of your made up claims! Desperate attempts to profane the trustworthy information by closing the thread and ban the poster are incredibly evident and as such should be considered as your complete defeat.

Guys, you failed..Admit this and never get back just for the sake of your dignity.

Originally posted by Leevi
Wow, guys. Now you're not only running out of sources, but even out of your made up claims! Desperate attempts to profane the trustworthy information by closing the thread and ban the poster are incredibly evident and as such should be considered as your complete defeat.

Wow, Leevi. You really want to look upon the likes of stellarx as a mentor-type? Stellarx, who can't deal with dissenting opinions without resorting to personal attacks? Who, as we've now seen simply cuts and pastes the same "information" over and over again and out of context to try and make his "points"? That's the kind of posting you look up to and are proud of? If you ever wanted to engage in any kind of dialogue with me in the future, consider your last post a sign of your complete defeat.



Oh, you mentioned that you were learning English in one of your first posts. Here's a word you may not have heard of. Check it out.

from wikipedia

In modern English, the term has come to mean one who seeks to please people in positions of authority or influence in order to gain power themselves, usually at the cost of pride, principles, and peer respect.

[edit on 1/24/2007 by centurion1211]

Originally posted by Leevi
Wow, guys. Now you're not only running out of sources, but even out of your made up claims! Desperate attempts to profane the trustworthy information by closing the thread and ban the poster are incredibly evident and as such should be considered as your complete defeat.

Guys, you failed..Admit this and never get back just for the sake of your dignity.

Why do you have to defend him? His posts have been answered over and over again to be proven wrong by the opposing view, and all he can do is to repost them over and over again. His sources are junk. Giving him any more attention than that would be a waste of time. So why do I think I am answering Stellar in your post? Multiple posting personalities by the same person on this forum, I believe, are against the rules. If you are Stellar, you should be banned for that reason alone, which I believe you are, and should. So are you going to insult me now?

Originally posted by rogue1
Yes agreed with the above 3 posters, stellar is just wasting server space with his hige discredited cut and pastes.

Please post links to threads where ANY part of my central theories have been discredited.

I think ( and this isn't meant to be an insult, just an observation ) that he is slightly delusional.

Whoever disagrees and persists to do so must obviously have some kind of mental defect. Free speech and reason in general should only be used to ridicule countries and people who might get killed for attempting it...

[quopte]
There was a time where he'd almost beg me for my approval of his posts.

There was a time when i though you had the knowledge to be a sounding board but as i learnt more about this subject ( and so many related one's) i realised you had no interest in reading anything that might contradict your prior held beliefs; i never begged for your approval and that should be easy for interested parties to investigate.

I began by showng him what was incorrect with his information, almost straight away he started to attack me personally on teh board and in chat.

The personal attacks started when you realised you had no real reason to disagree but for your personal opinions based on your general level of understanding on this issue; it's not your fault that you have a decidedly average view of the world and seem to believe what most others do.

Once again we have exchanged many posts and it should not be too hard to provide links of your own if the following does not accurately reflect our 'history' together.

ttp://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread144543/pg1

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

And here is a link to the last discussion where you actually introduced some facts even if that did not help your bias any...

www.abovetopsecret.com...

I must admit, I gave him many of the links about Russian super weapons with the caveat that it was mostly disinformation from the Cold War, but didn't think he would take it so literally.

Why you think you must resort to such lies is beyond me but what do you think it proves if you did i fact provide me with material that i can now defend in a very factual manner?

I also ( a mistake in hindsight ) pointe him to informtion on P2P file sharing about sca;ar weapns and weather engineering.

I actually got one of Tom's books before i even joined ATS and were familiar with his theories on such weapons long before i attempted to investigate&validate in in the last year or so.

I didn't know back then that he's have a hard tme distinguishing fact from fiction.

Today's fiction is either tomorrows fact or a well hidden reality of today. I think the record will illustrate which party in this 'discussion' consistently argues against what is observably real and refuses to ever reevaluate their ways based on information they were simply completely ignorant of.

Stellar

[edit on 24-1-2007 by StellarX]

This is a warning, the only warning note, if the off topic'ness of this thread carries on I will lock it.

Originally posted by StellarX
The personal attacks started when you realised you had no real reason to disagree but for your personal opinions based on your general level of understanding on this issue; it's not your fault that you have a decidedly average view of the world and seem to believe what most others do.

And the personal attacks continue. The fact is you don't have a view of the world based on any type of experience. You regurgitate crapola from the internet and cannot understand the truth from the fiction. I understand this is from a feeble intelect. It as if you were a caveman trying to tech Einstein ( ME ! ) physics. That's the best comparison I can draw.

Once again we have exchanged many posts and it should not be too hard to provide links of your own if the following does not accurately reflect our 'history' together.

LOl after browsing a few at random, I couldn't help but laugh at how you could see them as some sort of victory. I especially like how you think how South Korea invaded North Korea, then the NK's beat them back and SK begged for US help. What a stupid statement, this just shows your lack of knowledge.
Thanks for posting the links, I think most if not all people will agree with me.



[edit on 24-1-2007 by rogue1]

Originally posted by UK Wizard
This is a warning, the only warning note, if the off topic'ness of this thread carries on I will lock it.

how about doing your mod duties and warning the people who threw this thread out of wack?, myself and others only stepped in to inform the misinformed and got personally attacked for it.





[edit on 24-1-2007 by ape]

UK Wizard: I still have many of ape's post's to respond to and most of them are related to this thread if sometimes loosely and in need of moderation....

Originally posted by rogue1
And the personal attacks continue.

I can't make you stop so what do you expect me to do in the absence of moderators that will deal with you?

The fact is you don't have a view of the world based on any type of experience.

For the sake of argument lets assume that. Please point out how may personal experiences , or absence of such, with nuclear weapons make the data as presented by FAS and so many others false?

You regurgitate crapola from the internet and cannot understand the truth from the fiction.

Please be more specific in your accusations if you want me to address them in any meaningful way.

I understand this is from a feeble intelect. It as if you were a caveman trying to tech Einstein ( ME !

) physics. That's the best comparison I can draw.

I consider myself quite ignorant of the totality that is reality and my intellectual 'powers' is most certainly feeble considering the vastness of the stores of knowledge i have ever reason to believe exist. The problem with you is not your ignorance, as we all are profoundly so, but your self serving belief that you actually have the world figured out and need not change your mind anymore.

LOl after browsing a few at random, I couldn't help but laugh at how you could see them as some sort of victory.

Not victory ( over ignorance?) as much as the establishment of what is true and in fact took place....

I especially like how you think how South Korea invaded North Korea, then the NK's beat them back and SK begged for US help.

And if you do not mind posting the link to that thread i am sure my foolishness will be exposed for one and all to see! If not i can re post all the data i base that view on so that interest parties might see why i ( and the CIA&others) arrived at that conclusion.

What a stupid statement, this just shows your lack of knowledge.

Go scream at the CIA and insult their intelligence gathering apparatus if you like.

Thanks for posting the links, I think most if not all people will agree with me.

My pleasure as it's nice to know where people stand in relation to the truth.

Stellar

[edit on 25-1-2007 by StellarX]

Despite previous attempts in this thread to paint a rosy picture of the economic situation in russia, as well as stating that russia's nuclear weapons program was under control, we get this troubling news today from the Communist News Network (CNN).

nuclear news

Republic of Georgia authorities, aided by the CIA, set up a sting operation last summer that led to the arrest of a Russian man who tried to sell a small amount of nuclear-bomb grade uranium in a plastic bag in his jacket pocket, U.S. and Georgian officials said.

That's right. This russian was apparantly so desperate for $ and also so stupid that he was carrying around bomb grade uranium in a plastic baggy in his coat pocket.

The operation, which neither government has publicized, represents one of the most serious cases of smuggling of nuclear material in recent years, according to analysts and officials.

The arrest underscored concerns about the possibility of terrorists acquiring nuclear bomb-making material on the black market, although there was no suggestion that this particular case was terrorist-related.

Authorities say they do not know how the man acquired the nuclear material or if his claims of access to much larger quantities were true.

Yes, the russians have everything under control. Instead it looks like it's time for more U.S. covert missions into russia to "help" them deal with their problems.

Georgian attempts to trace the nuclear material since the arrest and confirm whether the man indeed had access to larger quantities have foundered from a lack of cooperation from Russia.

Russia needs to quit worrying about its lost "super power" status and instead start taking care of serious internal problems that have international implications.

Russian authorities took a sample of the material but failed to offer any assistance despite requests for help from the Georgians, Merabishvili said.

"We were ready to provide all the information, but unfortunately no one arrived from Russia, not even to interview this person," Merabishvili said. "It is surprising because it is in Russian interests to secure these materials. There are terrorist organizations in Russia who would pay huge amounts of money for this."

More evidence that russians lack the ability or interest to take control of their own nuclear materials.

"Russian cooperation in answering these questions is critical but it has not been forthcoming," he said. "One way to identify who is active in trading these materials is to conduct sting operations," he said.

Yes, but to solve a problem russia must take its head out of the sand or (somewhere with even less light) and admit that there is a problem. And then cooperate with the countries such as the U.S. that have the technology and resources to really help.

The really stupid thing about all this is that at the same time that russia can't control its nuclear materials, it is selling missile technology to countries like iran. If someone in iran (and they're working feverishly to do this) puts the two together, they'll have a nuclear ballistic missile with just the range to hit ........... russia! Earth to russia: as a non-muslim country, you will also be considered a "great satan" when iran starts throwing its nuclear weight around. Or is it that russia is trying to appease iran by selling them this technology and also supporting iran in the UN? Which is something a real super power would never do.

After that, the world will be discussing the russian rubble instead of the russian ruble. (Paraphrasing Larry the Cable Guy: Sorry, but I don't care who you are, that was funny!)

Super power status for russia? Not (nyet).

[edit on 1/25/2007 by centurion1211]

Originally posted by StellarX

I especially like how you think how South Korea invaded North Korea, then the NK's beat them back and SK begged for US help.

And if you do not mind posting the link to that thread i am sure my foolishness will be exposed for one and all to see! If not i can re post all the data i base that view on so that interest parties might see why i ( and the CIA&others) arrived at that conclusion.[/QUOTE]

Oh please post this " information " of yours. I would truly like to see it. LOL and now the CIA is saying the South attacked the North ? C'mon this is stupid.
I'm wondering why teh underequipped South Korean Army would attacked the well equipped and well trained North Korean Army ? See this is where your lack of logic is exposed for all to see.

Go scream at the CIA and insult their intelligence gathering apparatus if you like.

You never provided anything which says the CIA accused the SOuth of attacking the NOrth.