Russia Issues Nuke Warning

reply to post by musselwhite

I already wrote several times that Russia would only profit from attack on Iran. But PR China would be loser.
Click for PRC.

reply to post by Vojvoda


It would appear so.

Give me you thoughts on this link where "Isn't it wonderful to look at the world through the eyes of a camera? A picture paints a thousand words, a good photo a million!" Photos by baybaikal (look through the eyes of this camera) www.flickr.com...@N00/

What more do you know and what would be your spin on the Shanghai Cooperation Organization? I need a little help here so be patient.

reply to post by musselwhite

Link to flickr.com doesn't work.

It is obvious that world is going into large blocks/superstates: EU (from EEC), NAFTA (probably future NAU), African Union, ASEAN, SCO, Unasur/Unasul and etc.

reply to post by Vojvoda


please forgive. I put in "russia and china" on Google Earth and found this link, www.flickr.com...@N00/, of a photo by baybaikal entitled "China Meets Russia".

There is absolutely nothing surprising about this announcement, at least for the people who are aware of current priorities for Russia's armed forces, and current policy shift by Putin's administration. Russia has been making announcement regarding new priorities for its nuclear forces and cancelling various Cold War and post-Cod War treaties, for the last 7 years or so (if you hadn't noticed). This can be all grouped into a single strategy, along with Putin's other maneuvering (oil, possible restructuring of the goverment).

Russia has recently been attempting to enter the world stage soon after Putin came to power, and increase its influence around the globe, with moderate difficulty. To put it lightly, other world powers (read U.S. and team) are very reluctant to see Russia get out of its "neutered bear in a coma" state of 1990's. The government realized that the biggest thing going for Russia besides oil, is its nuclear assets. This is Russia's ace in the game of world politics. Today Russia cannot match the military might and combat readiness around the world of U.S. and team. So it decides to build on its competitive advantage - nuclear power. First Putin declares that new ballistic missiles are being developed. Then he makes a large investment in development of new ballistic submarines. Then he cancels the various arms treaties that were meant but to neutralize Russia as much as possible during and after the Cold War. And now he declares that Russia can use its nukes (wave them around, not launch) to play world politics. That's it.


U.S. would have done the same, but it doesn't need nukes or nuclear threats to project its power around the globe. It has aircraft carriers, bomber fleets, and navy assets, and military bases around the world. That is how U.S. projects its power. Russia simply cannot do this (nor can China or anyone else at this point). You can't expect them to sit the game out, so they are playing with what they have.

There is really no need to be concerned that Russia is going to nuke anyone first, because its government is hardly suicidal. But with this recent announcement there is a "what if" situation, which adds just a little bit of unpredictability. This might do very little but force the U.S. to think twice about doing something idiotic as say attacking Iran with full force.

Maybe if the next Russian president will be a little more adventurous, he can yell out more sinister threats and even take off his shoe and shake it at U.S. diplomats. There will be at least a few people in the West who will use this as an excuse to hide in their underground shelters and prophesize on World War 3 (after all everyone is a little scared of unpredictable psychos, even if they only play the part).

Russia and U.S. may be on a slow collision path, but this collision will not involve any shooting, nuking, or armagedons (but you can still fantasize). It will involve cleverly disguised speeches and threats, and a shoving match using all the know-how from the international economics/politics textbook.

[edit on 20-1-2008 by maloy]

Do someone remember when China in the sixties was saying this: Bring nuclear war, we don't care if we lose 50% of our population, we have underground cities, we'll win in the end... China doesn't see nuclear war as the end of the world, they have underground cities that they built during the cold war. They nearly went to nuclear war against the soviet union and some chineses generals were saying bring it on, we'll take back the whole asia.

Russia will soon change president, we'll soon see how much it will affect Russian's policies.

api.flickr.com/services/feeds/ geo/?id=73202836@N00&lang=en-us&format=rss_200 - 40k

i hope this link works. if it does not, please go to google earth and type in china and russia, then click on the "china meets russia"

someone help me out here, i'm having a little technical difficulty......my lack of technical ability"

Iran and Syria are not Russian allies, never have been and probably never going to be. They are partners.
So this warning was not about them, and to speak of Russia making nuclear attack on anyone attacking Iran/Syria is plain stupid.
Then, Russia just doesn't care about Israel, and has no plans of attacking nor invading it. Any talk about this is just religious paranoia on behalf of those who are fed with this Gog/Magog fairytale.

First strike doctrine is long adopted by U.S. and any talk about Russia having no right for it is example of hypocrisity and double standard.

[edit on 24-1-2008 by Ingvar]

Typed this up a few days ago but couldn't decide if i should post or not.

Originally posted by maloy
Russia has recently been attempting to enter the world stage soon after Putin came to power, and increase its influence around the globe, with moderate difficulty.

What has convinced you that this only started happening after Putin came to power? When last were Russia a small player in the world energy markets and where did all their strategic power suddenly come from if not from the same old nuclear weapons they had in the 90's and 80's? Basically why do you feel the serious economic problems the RF experienced ever weakened their ability to project power in the most conventional NBC sense of the word?

To put it lightly, other world powers (read U.S. and team) are very reluctant to see Russia get out of its "neutered bear in a coma" state of 1990's. The government realized that the biggest thing going for Russia besides oil, is its nuclear assets. This is Russia's ace in the game of world politics.

But how many of the things that happened to the RF in the 90's weakened those who control that society? Sure the 90's were very bad for the people but what does that really have so much to do with the central governments ability to fire it's nuclear weapons or sell energy and raw materials?

Today Russia cannot match the military might and combat readiness around the world of U.S. and team.

In my reading the USSR and Russia haves since the start of the ICBM age focused it's military efforts on fighting and winning a nuclear third world war and there was never any serious effort to build the infrastructure that would allow them to project conventional firepower into foreign lands ten thousand miles away. To confuse the relative inability of the RF to today project conventional firepower to bomb weak third world nations into oblivion should be seen against the background of the US inability ( Vietnam, Korea, Iraq, Afghanistan, Kosovo ) , with much much greater capacity, to do the same. Also i would argue that Russians are far less interested in dying for a central government than is Americans as the martial culture indoctrination seems to have been quite ineffective for Russians while they managed to avoid believing all the nonsense that Americans believe about the world.. Unless the Russian government can ensure that it's citizens believe that another country has attacked them they are clearly not going to do the dirty work that empire building requires.

So it decides to build on its competitive advantage - nuclear power. Putin declares that new ballistic missiles are being developed.

The Russian have held a advantage in deployed nuclear weaponry ( throw weight, range and yield and even numbers) since at least the late 70's and they do not need new ballistic missiles to maintain that superiority.

Then he makes a large investment in development of new ballistic submarines.

But i don't see why Russia needs new ballistic missile submarines at all! The one's they have are perfectly good ( even when the US navy knows their general patrol area they can't find them) for another decade and after that they could really just go with land mobile assets. People who actually believe that satellite's can track such systems ( or read number plates) not only needs their heads examined but should stop watching TV and instead wonder how those will survive the opening salvo's of both countries DEW's. Why Putin wants to build TWELVE Borei class SSBN's by 2015 ( one completed and two nearing finish with no under laid down yet) is quite beyond me when three typhoons , and two other Typhoons have not been scrapped just yet, and half a dozen Delta Iv's are still good well into the next decade!

Then he cancels the various arms treaties that were meant but to neutralize Russia as much as possible during and after the Cold War.

The former USSR not only initiated most arms treaties discussions but benefited by all of them while breaking or subverting those they chose to. arms reduction treaties have consistently benefited the USSR and then Russia ( who could barely afford some of the more outdated systems they gave up any ways) while the US gave up far more important and newer weapons. If Putin now chooses to simply nullify the treaties officially it's more likely because he understands that the US economy is bankrupt and that the Russia and it's Chinese allies are the only people who have actual honest to god money to spend on such. If the US wishes to take part in such spending it will be deficit spending further serving to destroy what remains of the mirage of 'economy'.

And now he declares that Russia can use its nukes (wave them around, not launch) to play world politics. That's it.

The absence of western reporting on the issue hardly means Russia stopped threatening to use force in the last two decades! You don't take the word of just anyone if they tell you that it's OK to go kick the 'dead' tiger!

I would have done the same, but it doesn't need nukes or nuclear threats to project its power around the globe. It has aircraft carriers, bomber fleets, and navy assets, and military bases around the world. That is how U.S. projects its power.

The US projects it's power through it's control of oil and energy markets as well as it's generally very large consumer market. It's armed forces are trimming on that cake and have rarely been used to do much else but destroy SOCIAL systems that would show up the absolute devastation that capitalism leaves in it's wake.

Russia simply cannot do this (nor can China or anyone else at this point). You can't expect them to sit the game out, so they are playing with what they have.

First we should ask if military might is really required if the citizens of any given country wants to live well! Does the Japanese, Danes, Norwegians or Swedes regularly invade people and if not how do they manage the highest average ' living standards' in the world? I would go as far as to say that there is NO direct relation between the wealth of a given people ( not their corporate bosses) and their military prowess.

There is really no need to be concerned that Russia is going to nuke anyone first, because its government is hardly suicidal. But with this recent announcement there is a "what if" situation, which adds just a little bit of unpredictability.

The Russian government has always been far less suicidal than the American one hence it's rabid efforts to build up passive defenses and create the type of infrastructure that would allow it's citizens to survive a full blown nuclear exchange. The US national security states imperialist agenda have done far more to destabilize the world and has on at least a few occasions almost sparked another world war.

This might do very little but force the U.S. to think twice about doing something idiotic as say attacking Iran with full force.

There is no longer sufficient volunteer forces to even invade another country and unless there is a draft and a multi year period of refurbishment the US armed forces will have to rely on a ten year period of sanctions and air bombardment to create the conditions suitable for a ground invasion. That's how you would do it if you were trying to avoid many more tens of thousands of American combat casualties but since they do not really care ( beside for the terrible PR that results in) they might very well try it!

Maybe if the next Russian president will be a little more adventurous, he can yell out more sinister threats and even take off his shoe and shake it at U.S. diplomats. There will be at least a few people in the West who will use this as an excuse to hide in their underground shelters and prophesize on World War 3 (after all everyone is a little scared of unpredictable psychos, even if they only play the part).

It's know a acknowledged fact that the large majority of the worlds population fears US aggression without mentioning fears about Russian territorial ambitions...

Russia and U.S. may be on a slow collision path, but this collision will not involve any shooting, nuking, or armagedons (but you can still fantasize).

The collision happened back in 1976-77 and in my opinion the US has been losing ground ever since..... The 'breakup' of the USSR were orchestrated in much the same the western European empires gave up their territories when they no longer yielded easy profits that could not know be better exploited in more covert ways. The crisis of the late 90's were in my opinion the result of mismanagement and western attempts to undermine the only part of the Russian system ( in military arena they were pretty much out of it) that could still be while Russian strategic weapons ensured that the US disarmed and were largely left with global policing forces and ineffective and a ineffective and outdated nuclear arsenal.

It will involve cleverly disguised speeches and threats, and a shoving match using all the know-how from the international economics/politics textbook.

And still the vast majority of people will believe that the US still reigns supreme in both economy and military spheres!

Stellar

Originally posted by Vitchilo
Do someone remember when China in the sixties was saying this: Bring nuclear war, we don't care if we lose 50% of our population, we have underground cities, we'll win in the end...

That's not what they said! The gist of it was that they believe China could never be defeated unless physically invaded and they were confident that no one would be able to do that. Nuclear weapons would inflict a telling tole on infrastructure but fallout does quickly dissipate and as long as you have space , rifle's and people to use ( ALA Korea where Chinese troops with almost no support beside small calibre mortars and heavy machine guns) were initially able to drive back armored forces with air support and later to hold their ground against the same.

It's VERY hard to defeat a people or nation that just refuses to give up and unlike Vietnam and Korea before it China had time to somewhat recooperate from the damage done by previous occupiers and invaders.

China doesn't see nuclear war as the end of the world, they have underground cities that they built during the cold war

The Chinese efforts were concentrated on a relatively small elite but the Russians expanded their efforts to allow protection for almost all of ther urban population.

The Soviets spend the equivalent of more than $1 billion annually (the CIA in Soviet Civil Defense estimates approximately $2 billion) on their CD program and have conducted some tests of their city evacuation plans. Although the extent of these tests is not fully known, they concentrate efforts on protecting political and military leaders, industrial managers, and skilled workers. Professor Richard Pipes of Harvard sees the CD organization under Altunin as "...a kind of shadow government charged with responsibility for administering the country under the extreme stresses of nuclear war and its immediate aftermath."24

The potential lifesaving effectiveness of the Soviet CD program is not a matter of unanimous agreement. However, several studies estimate casualty rates as low as two to three percent of the Soviet population in the event of nuclear war.25

www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil...

In contrast to the U.S.'s desultory interest in civil defense, the Soviet Union is well advanced on a thoroughgoing program to protect its people against nuclear attack. The Soviet government has built shelters by the thousands and organized elaborate training programs, reported the Rand Corp.'s Leon Gouré, leading U.S. authority on Soviet civil defense, at a civil defense conference last week at the University of California at Los Angeles.

The Soviet civil defense effort is expanding steadily on a compulsory basis. "Once the Soviet government makes a decision of this sort," said Gouré, "it does not have to ask for public support or popular approval." Under directives from the Ministry of Internal Affairs, all units right down to collective farms and apartment houses are required to organize so-called volunteer self-defense groups consisting of 48 trained fire fighters, shelter attendants and first-aid workers for every 500 residents. A claimed 22 million Soviet citizens—10% of the whole population-serve in these formations. Since 1955, these units have carried through three compulsory training courses for all citizens. This winter, says Gouré, the Soviet Union is giving every urban citizen between the ages of 16 and 55 an 18-hour course in how to protect himself against nuclear attack and how to behave in shelters. "Soviet shelter facilities," says Gouré, "are the most extensive anywhere." They range from concrete installations in every factory to the root cellar under every peasant hut.

www.time.com...

They nearly went to nuclear war against the soviet union and some chineses generals were saying bring it on, we'll take back the whole asia.

When did all of that happen?

Russia will soon change president, we'll soon see how much it will affect Russian's policies.

As suspect it will change about as much about the RF's foreign policy as US elections changes the US foreign policy. If you don't know that means it doesn't change much if at all.

Stellar

[note to self: Learn Russian/ Learn to dance ballet/ eat more Sturgeon/ find a vodka that will not have me visualizing cave man drawings coming through the television/ and "MOVE!"]

Originally posted by krill
reply to post by Vojvoda

 

thank you for pointing that out to me i had not been aware of the rise in oil prices idea, to tell the truth it completly never crossed my mind. i was aware that they provide a large quantity of oil, but for some reason did not connect the dots.

I forgot one more important thing in relations between Russia and Iran - Kremlin also has a dispute over the oil under the Caspian with Iran, where Moscow is arguing (correctly) that the Caspian is legally defined as the world’s largest lake (which would grant Russia the right to most of the Caspian oil) and not a sea, as it is commonly called, which would grant the right to much of the Caspian oil to Iran and Muslim countries in the south of the former Soviet Union.

In my opinion it is just necessary posteuring. Flex....leave us alone....we can defend ourselves..........if you must attack a close region..........don't even think about a next step into our territory......

reply to post by Fuggle


That about sums it up.

Keep in mind that each and every press conference is scripted to deliver a specific message to other nations, moreso the governments than the people. But if you scare the people the governments usually are forced to take a little more notice.