Russia plans new nuclear weapons

Russia plans new nuclear weapons

www.reuters.com

MOSCOW (Reuters) - President Vladimir Putin said on Thursday that Russia was working on new types of nuclear weapons as part of a "grandiose" plan to boost the country's defenses.

Putin, widely popular as his second four-year term draws to an end amid strong economic growth and rising incomes, has been trying to reassert Moscow's role on the international stage by reviving its armed forces, shattered by the tumultuous 1990s.

(visit the link for the full news article)

What do you think about this? Is this another cold war again? Frankly, I perfectly understand the reasoning for the purpose of its defenses, but will Bush get mad about it?

www.reuters.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

[edit on 18-10-2007 by TheoOne]

I thought Bush was already mad..

No, I think he realizes that he is starting a new arms race, specially by putting weapons in space and also planning a moon base. He doesnt care.

I dont really understand how he thinks he can afford it though. The country is already in a 9 trillion dollar debt.

(graph not updated for 2007)

US National Debt Clock
US National Debt FAQ


[edit on 18-10-2007 by Copernicus]

Could these new nuclear weapons be mid-range missiles designed to hit Europe? Could be in retaliation for the missile shield, which couldn't possibly stop a missile strike from Russia anyway

I thought Bush was already mad..

No, I think he realizes that he is starting a new arms race, specially by putting weapons in space and also planning a moon base. He doesnt care.

I don't blame the US for continuing to advance their military capabilities, considering they now face a resurgent Russia, a rapid military build up from China and numerous rogue states knocking at the door. America's involved in a multiple front cold war, they're gonna need some serious weapons in order to stay number 1.

A new arm's race of the Nuclear variety? Let's face it that is a bold and quite profound statement. Challenging a country with the highest defence R&D budget on the planet by far is a very risky business.

I'm not very familar with current nuke models etc. Who currently has the biggest arsenal and more sophisticated warheads?

Since when did nuclear weapons become 'defensive' ?

Originally posted by psperos
Since when did nuclear weapons become 'defensive' ?

I'm guessing he means in the form of a deterant, it can prevent intial attack he could argue.

If there's a new cold war, the US will be screwed. The US economy is about to collapse and like the US did to Russia in 89, defeat it by collapsing it's economy, China and Russia have the power to blow up the US economy too.

So either there's no new cold war, or either the US population will become so poor it will be hell because all the money will be needed to be spent on ``military development`` to deter the ``reds``.... thus the military industrial complex winning again against the worldwide population.

Are you not tired of being screwed by sickos running your governments and manipulating you?

reply to post by Vitchilo


Yes but China has a huge reliance on the US. Chinese power emergence is mainly derived from the massive manufacturing industry which in turn is actually spurned from US and European owned companies. Any Cold War and China stands to lose its new found power, especially if Europe decides to side with the US as it should.

Since China has a huge amount of numbers in army, this might mean they might as well be prepared for the war, or do they want a war?

I remember a chinese president/leader stated once, that "If our population gets attacked, there's no doubt population will be reproduced again"

Kinda scary.

Originally posted by TheoOne

I remember a chinese president/leader stated once, that "If our population gets attacked, there's no doubt population will be reproduced again"

Kinda scary.

Talking about Mao Zedong?

If nuclear weapons are involved, numbers don't matter. Instead of killing a population of 5 million in a city, it would be 20 million because of the density instead of just 5 million. Still would kill many.

Originally posted by patrickbateman
... Any Cold War and China stands to lose its new found power, especially if Europe decides to side with the US as it should.

As it should? Let me guess, your American? You can't be European, or are you?

Why should the EU take ANY side in this conflict? Just look at our economic boost, at the EURO, at all our (German f.e.) economic relations to Russia and so on. I am sorry, but if there is a new Cold War (in my opinion it has never ended), Europe would never be the battleground, so we either don't pick any side or we will stay put to the Russians.

Really, who needs America anymore? Most of you guys live in the USA and you really have no idea about public opinion related to the USA here in Europe. Support for a strong Russia is rising, everywhere in Europe. It's time to put and end to US Imperialism and this big lie called "Terrorist Threat" - If the US can does what they want without any approval from the UN, so can Russia. At least, they didn't bomb a dozen country's in the past 20 years.

The world needs balance. Understand, that even the US needs a stronger Russia. It's a closed circle, a game. Bad thing is, we can only speculate. History for the next years is already written, all we can do is sit, and watch, be part of the game called live.

Why such a fear? New atomic bombs for Russia? So what? Did they say they wanna invade any country? Did the say anything about their "Axis of Evil"? Did they kill own people in order to excuse any invasion? Did they do anything to HARM any country in the past 2 decades? Did they prohibit other "evil" country's to gain access to space?

Well, the US did all those things. So don't wonder friends, the world is waking up. Time to say goodbye and take a rest. A long rest, after your economy collapses over the next years.

In two words: Don't other about Russia, but yourself.

(Americans, please don't be upset about my post, it's about your government, not about you as nice and friendly people, as I know your are)

absent`e

reply to post by absente


Wish I could star you more than once (I'm American btw)

Nuclear weapons are defensive weapons in the terms that they can be used as a deterrent.

Nuclear equipped nations have very little chance of being caught up in an all out defensive war... let's face it, no-one in their right mind will try to destroy a country that's armed to the teeth with Nuclear weapons.


Historically though, the United States is the ONLY country on the face of the earth that has ever used nuclear technology offensively

Therefore, through simple logic, the United States is the last country you should ever trust with Nuclear Arms.


The Russians have had nuclear weapons for almost as long as the United States have... they haven't launched a single nuclear weapon in anger.

I trust them with it.

Originally posted by absente

Really, who needs America anymore? Most of you guys live in the USA and you really have no idea about public opinion related to the USA here in Europe. Support for a strong Russia is rising, everywhere in Europe. It's time to put and end to US Imperialism and this big lie called "Terrorist Threat" - If the US can does what they want without any approval from the UN, so can Russia. At least, they didn't bomb a dozen country's in the past 20 years.

Thats not what I've been hearing in Eastern Europe. Maybe it has to do with memories of Soviet occupation. And perhaps tensions currently in existence. Bomb a country in the past twenty years, last one was in Chechnya and that was back in 1999, not exactly 20 years. Back in 1987 they were bombing Afghanistan. Anyways.........

Originally posted by johnsky

The Russians have had nuclear weapons for almost as long as the United States have... they haven't launched a single nuclear weapon in anger.

I trust them with it.

Thats because World War 2 was over before Russia could try and use it against Germany, didn't get their hands on the technology till 1949.

And since WW2 America haven't use nuclear weapons in anger...I trust them with it.

Originally posted by deltaboy
Thats not what I've been hearing in Eastern Europe. Maybe it has to do with memories of Soviet occupation. And perhaps tensions currently in existence. Bomb a country in the past twenty years, last one was in Chechnya and that was back in 1999, not exactly 20 years. Back in 1987 they were bombing Afghanistan. Anyways.........

Well, I live in Eastern Europe (Bulgaria), and i visited Russia, Ukraine and Latvia very often the past 5 years. But, just reading the pres will do the job - support for Russia is rising, i think no one can deny that. Same opinion?

Chechnya is quite different that the US aggression in the Middle East, i suppose you know about it, when you bring it out. And history about the Russia-Afghanistan war involves the US from the very beginning. But, okay, let's talk then about the past 5 years.

(I didn't say that Russia has a white vest)

Originally posted by absente
Well, I live in Eastern Europe (Bulgaria), and i visited Russia, Ukraine and Latvia very often the past 5 years. But, just reading the pres will do the job - support for Russia is rising, i think no one can deny that. Same opinion?

Visiting there doesn't mean you were taking a pulse on their views of Russia, especially in Russia itself. But since you want to use that excuse to back up your statement, I suggest you visit Georgia and Poland as well.

Chechnya is quite different that the US aggression in the Middle East, i suppose you know about it, when you bring it out. And history about the Russia-Afghanistan war involves the US from the very beginning. But, okay, let's talk then about the past 5 years.

(I didn't say that Russia has a white vest)

Any different from U.S. aggression? Typical response. I'll let that past. Including the U.S. involvement in Afghanistan does not make an excuse for Soviet Union's invasion of Afghanistan, since the Soviets wanted to maintain a govt. they support which was getting very unpopular in the first place. Had nothing to do with the U.S. till the invasion. Think of it as a payback for backing North Vietnam.

UHHHHHH Can you see Cold War II possibly leading up to WW3?

Originally posted by psperos
Since when did nuclear weapons become 'defensive' ?

Research NIKE missiles.

They were small nukes mounted on missiles to detonate over oceans in the vicinity of an approaching warhead. One nuclear explosion prevents another from happening over land.