Russia ‘Had Laser Cannons Before U.S.’

reply to post by West Coast

What a pathetic excuse of an argument you have provided. The words of Colonel John Alexander (former Program Director of Los Alamos Lab.) should be enough evidence.

a youtube video is no evidence ,but if you can post a source , that would be a written down interview script, , then yes post a link ...

Russia lied about WMD's in Iraq as did the french, the british, etc. apply equal standards, if you are capable..

proof??? from what i know Russia ,France,China opposed the war in Iraq

I question relativeness of your comment in regards to freedom, as US citizens enjoy the most freedoms of any nation.

the way its foriegn policy spreads 'freedom'


also looking at the hallyboo , this website has on USA=nazi, something is indeed wrong with USA

I am sure you wish to believe there is some relativity to what a bunch of patriotic Ruskies say,
this argument by you was lost a few days ago when I provided a source by the programs director of Los Alamos, Colonel John Alexander. I think he would have more information at his disposal in regards to this very subject...

so now , Teller and cohen are ruskies , mind proofing it, by the way i am not A RUSSIAN .....

and John Alexander was not in charge of soviet weapons programs..

Another example of a poor argument.

no proof ???? seems USA has no underground cities comparable to Russia

reply to post by The Godfather of Conspira

You have to be kidding... The Antonov-22 Cargo Plane in warfare? It wouldn't last a minute.

proof??? B-52 , C-130 , Boeig 747 laser craft are subsonic
an-22 with ECM jamming and protection will last

Top speed of 740km/h? Imagine that thing trying to evade SAM's or enemy fighters...

then how do B-52/ C-130 remain in combat status , Hint:ECM jammers

Mate you have to put things into perspective, the Russians wouldn't have doen that because it's not sound military thinking. You don't put weapons onto civilian aircraft.. Name me one other Cargo/Fighter plane in the world.. lol

The An-22 was originally built for the Soviet Air Force and Aeroflot, the state airline. One unit that operated it was the 566th 'Solnechnogorsk' Military Transport Aviation Regiment, which u
----
Operators

[edit] Military

Flag of the Soviet Union Soviet Union

* Soviet Air Force.

Flag of Russia Russia

* Russian Air Force.
en.wikipedia.org...

An-22 was used by soviet Air force

Exactly my point.

How do we know which ones the Russians were developing?

clearly , the russian expert was talking about chemical lasers

That's a bit ignorant. I would read this before making that call: www.think-aboutit.com... The US has huge installations dotting the landscape, most you've probably never even heard of.

a UFO conspiracy site ??? its like tinwiki.org , so its not credible ...

use proper sources , like globalsecurity,fas,pravda.ru,aeronautics.ru, or xakep.ru

I seriously doubt they have 27 of any type of installation, let alone massive underground complexes the size of cities. It would break their economy even more. Where are you getting this from?

the russian Ogonek Report of 1993 ... and yes Yamantau facility si the size of Washington DC ...

and Tsar Bell was Bell not military weapon , not an example

Exactly my point. Numbers. More. More.

BS, you are cherrypicking facts

They knew the US developed counterparts were far superior so they relied on strength through NUMBERS.

crap arguement , the T-80U was superior to all NATO and m1 tanks of its time , only the development of M1A2 managed to make it superior

and soviets developed the first composite armour for T-64B, which is th father of all composite armour including composite chobham armour concept

The first widespread use of a composite armour appears to have been on the Soviet T-64. It used an armour known as Combination K, which apparently is glass reinforced plastic sandwiched between inner and outer steel layers.
Through a mechanism called thixotropy, the resin changes to a fluid under constant pressure, allowing the armour to be moulded into curved shapes. Later models of the T-64, along with newer designs, used a boron carbide-filled resin aggregate for greatly improved
protection.
en.wikipedia.org...

now on radars:
The Russians have produced some of the damn finest radars in phased array. Do you know that the Russians were the first to employe phased array radars? Do you know the Russians were the first to emploe HMS? Russian technology is widely discredited because it has been used by incompetent forces in an incompetent manner in the ME.

Now Russians still have one of the finest radar industry. Check out the radar specs for the Bars radar employed in the Su-30MKI, then you will find out its capability, then compare it with the radar on the An-APG-68(V)9. There is a reason why the Su-30MKI is caleld a "Mini-AWACS".

Then check out the radar specs for the Irbis radar which is the proposed upgrade for the Su-30MKI. When you read its specs, i guarentee you will be amazed. Now figure if the MKI was called a mini awacs for having the Bars radar, what would it be with the Irbis-E radar.
so russikies were first ones to use PESA on fighters,the hen house abm radars were resistant to EMP,


continued.....

Does the openness of the American system ever work to its disadvantage?

No. And I know where this question leads. There is so much talking and writing about Russians implementing other countries' achievements into our weapon systems. This was done but to about one-tenth the level that most Americans probably suspect. I'd like to quote chief designer of the MIG-29 and a man for whom I worked for many years Mikhail Waldenberg. He said "Seeing how your neighbor plows his field does not prevent you from pouring your sweat when you plow your own field."

There was much speculation that the MIG-29's radar was a copy of the Hughes' APO-65 on the F/A-18. I swear this was not the case. The radars first of all are completely different. Russian radar designers went through their own paces to get what they got. We did acquire the APO-65 but it was too late in our design process to use it.

When an air-to-air missile was chosen for the MIG-29 in the early 1970s we had access to an AIM-7 Sparrow from North Vietnam. The missile was closely inspected and evaluated. We decided that it was not any better than our own R-27 missile (NATO-designated AA-10 Alamo) which was being developed for the MIG-29. The Sparrow was put on the shelf and forgotten.



The perception that we copied everything we could is not true. In fact I cannot think of one system in the MIG-29 that was copied from an American system. We went our own way and made our own mistakes. We tried of course to use foreign information to develop our system better. The MIG-29 and Su-27 have an infrared search and track and a laser rangefinder. There is no such system on the equivalent American fighters.

The MIG-31 had the first airborne phased-array radar with electronic scanning. The system permits you to throw the radar beam from one sector to another without having to mechanically move an antenna dish. Until your Advanced Tactical Fighter, not a single American fighter had an active phased-array radar with electronic scanning. Your first airborne electronic scanning radar, the APQ-164, was on the B-1B. It appeared about two or three years after the MIG-31 radar.

In his recent book, Fulcrum, Alexander Zuyev, a top MIG-29 pilot who defected to the West, documented that an American spy working at a Russian radar design and manufacturing bureau for many years gave away Russian secrets to America. I have not come across one mention of the possibility of Americans copying Russian radar technology even though the circumstances and timing seem to support this.

But I don't believe that your APQ-164 was a copy of ours. People on both sides of the Atlantic work on common problems and come up with similar solutions.

When we first came to America with the MIG-29 in 1990, I kept hearing and reading that we copied the F-14 because Our aircraft looks like the F-14. They also said that we copied the F-18 because the MIG-29 looks like the F-18. Well, it's true that all three aircraft have two fins and two engines.

Fortunately, the F-16 has a single engine and one fin, so I haven't noticed anyone saying that we copied the F-16. But the F-15, F-14, and F-18 have two engines and two fins, so we copied each and all of them. I've read this in dozens of publications. Well, from the front, the MIG-29 resembles the F-14. From the side, an F-15. Its overall takeoff weight is similar to the F/A-18. So what?

People trying to meet approximately the same requirements come to approximately the same solutions. That's physics, which is not colored in red, white, and blue - or red.

Assuming we're incorrect in these beliefs, why do you think Americans accuse the Soviets of stealing technology?

You have achieved so much. Your country is a mighty world power. So you tend to see everything as proof of your own achievements. You express self-pride at the expense of self-criticism. Americans have always underestimated the skills of foreigners - Asians, Europeans, everyone else.
www.codeonemagazine.com...

Haha I'm sorry but that's not true. The Russians wouldn't care if 75% of their peasants died in a Nuclear War, what mattered is that they could hit back at the US. You think they really valued their huge working class? They were practically slaves... they had no rights, no power, no influence.

more crap, soviets had a massive civil defence network and program to save 75%-95% civilian lives

This dispersal plan had a huge impact on city planning in the Soviet Union. When new cities were built, they were planned as dispersed cities with suburban populations instead of centralized towns (see above).
Changes to existing cities included constructing wide streets, artificial reservoirs, and a network of highways around the city, as well as reducing building density to reduce the possibility of blast and fire damage.
The Soviets, therefore, assumed that they would have enough advance warning of an American attack to implement the aforementioned evacuation and dispersal exercises. Through the use of these removals, pre-attack warning systems, and improved city planning, Soviet military leaders hoped to reduce the number of civilian and economic (industrial) losses.
www.piedmontcommunities.us...=page&GID=01303001151018293682662999&PG=01304001151018318529636575

The Soviet Union is prepared to wage war with several times our own nuclear firepower. At the same time, they are prepared to survive such a war as a viable society with population losses of perhaps no more than 2%. That's around five-million lives, and it is indeed very hard for you and me to imagine deliberately accepting such losses for a political purpose. But remember, the Soviet bosses think their way, not our way; and if they were to suffer losses that large, our(american) own losses could be 50- to 100-million!

www.etext.org...

continued.....

continued...

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 Table I provides a Summary comparison of CD-related factors between the U.S. and U.S. S. R., including some apparent perceptions of U.S. and Soviet leaders concerning their CD programs.26 This divergence in emphasis and perception may have an impact on U.S. national security strategy
www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil...

soviets estimated 75% populace would survive , but CIA assumed in best case scenario , with 5 million-10 civilian losses

At this particular interview, Major-General Keegan produced thousands of photographs, pamphlets, and "open-source documents" on Soviet military sites and civil defense projects in proof of his assertions upon these matters. In the words of Major-General Keegan: "American strategy is premised on the principle of war avoidance, while that of the Soviet Union is premised on war winning . . . The difference is a profound one.
www.christadelphia.org...

In the interview he said quite categorically that he believes Russia has already achieved military superiority over the U.S.

He spoke of the astonishing civil defense measures which have been developed, and continue to be developed, in the Soviet Union. He stated that 25% of all Russian factory workers are in training programs preparing them for civil defense leadership roles. Major defense manufacturing facilities in Russia have been dispersed well clear of all existing major industrial areas so as to afford a large measure of protection for those industries in the event of nuclear war. Keegan alleged that he was in possession of ample evidence to show that the Russians are in the process of building up huge stocks of foods and grains, in preparation for war. He said that all the evidence points to the fact that the Russians are not merely aiming for superiority but are "preparing for war. . . ." Evidence available quite openly in Russia, contained in Soviet literature, shows that already the Soviets have constructed enough mass-shelters in key strategic industrial areas to protect More than sixty million from nuclear attack. Bunkers have been provided for the civilian population in all main cities, including several which are the size of football fields. "My collection team." said the Major-General. "have identified grain-storage bunkers the size of several football fields on the perimeter of all main cities, guarded by the military -- the most elaborate of their kind in the world. We are observing the most extensive peace-time war preparations in recorded history. . ."

www.christadelphia.org...

in my opinion Russia bankrupted itself because it was spending immense resources on defensive measures like CD , underground complexes ,laser and plasma wepaons etc ..

The Soviets relied on numbers, mass and size. Quite a simple doctrine, effective but very simple.

wrong ,soviets relied on a combined arms approach which was quality superiority and quantity superiority too

Why do you think Russians threw their soldiers into war with the Germans with NO ammunition sometimes in WW2:

threw ??? seems like problem of logisitcs to me ...

and yes why did USA use Sherman tanks which could not stand up against Tiger tanks

Irrelevent. Russia is not using the T-98 because:

incorrect , as you stated that T-98 is not as capable in protection as HMMW...

They may know quite a lot about Directed Energy Weapons true. But they have NO clue about what Russia was developing during the Cold War. Their scientists not military analysts, their views are irrelevant
.
Right and how the hell could American scientists know what Russia was spending it's money on?

Did Teller or Asimov work for the CIA too?
Your generalising again.

proof????

Right and how the hell could American scientists know what Russia was spending it's money on?

incorrect , Russia was resource based economy till 1991.... not GDP based ....

Originally posted by West Coast
That is a rather presumptuous argument. The F117 was not the sole cause for the collapse of the Soviet Union, the fact that communism could not compete with capitalism was, however, from a technological standpoint, the soviets could no longer compete in military terms with the United States.

You where the one that felt it was important enough to mention the advent of 'stealth' somehow featuring in the 'defeat' of the USSR when such could clearly not be the case. Since 'communism' is such a loaded term( it means different things for different folks and the more ignorant the worse it gets) you should probably stick to saying that the Soviet system could not compete. If that is to be your argument i will but point out that the Soviet system was not 'competing' but doing it's best to survive in a very hostile capitalist controlled world.

A genuine superpower does not merely have to have a military and political influence, but also must be at the top of the economic latter,

As per the correct definition, maybe, but that is not what most people understands under that term and thus not very descriptive; the USSR were understood to be a superpower in terms of it's possession of a vast scientific and military industrial complex . If you wish to suggest that the USA had a far larger influence, especially as related to economics, on world affairs we would be in perfect agreement.

scientific, and cultural pyramids. It is this very mold of superpowerdom, which the US has set.

As compared to what empires in the past? In all seriousness there have been empires in the past that could easily rival or surpass the US, of the last fifty years, in all or most areas. China had by far the greatest GDP for much of the last two thousand years and if they had been interested in global domination...... Lets just say that superpowers comes and goes and that we should not just define them by their taste for global domination either.

If landing on the moon were easy, the USSR would have done it, as would several other space fairing nations.

IF doing all the other things first were so easy the US would have done them first; since the US directed so much energy on that single feat they managed it but not with much time to spare either. The real hoax , as so typically well explained by Mark Wade, is how the USSR having failed did their best to pretend that they didn't try! As it stands both countries were apparently more than willing to get to the moon first for shear bragging rights ( or particle beam weapon bases; the true high ground) but in this instance the US did manage a upset and trumped the Russian effort by days/weeks.

Fascinating reading so enjoy,

www.astronautix.com...

Stellar

[edit on 27-7-2008 by StellarX]

Hate to tell you, but the US Army was testing possible Laser weapons in the eraly 1960's at Fort Ord in California. CDEC (Combat Development Experimental Command) was field testing possible laser weapons in 1962 (I know because I was assigned to CDEC then).

Wouldn't surprise me at all if the Soviets were not working with them too. So what?

Most of them are really not very feasible for combat. They have to remain clean, cant take much shock, etc. In the 60's they took way too much power for what they put out. An artillery shell was more effective, and a whole lot cheaper.

Originally posted by StellarX
You where the one that felt it was important enough to mention the advent of 'stealth' somehow featuring in the 'defeat' of the USSR when such could clearly not be the case.

I know you have a soft spot towards Russia. But Russia is quite irrelevant on the world stage today. I will say my initial comment was taken a bit out of context (or wasn't explained particularly well on my part). Let me be clear here, Technologically, the soviets fell behind the Americans (This is even more relevant today, nearly two decades after the soviets stopped being competitive with America.)

Since 'communism' is such a loaded term( it means different things for different folks and the more ignorant the worse it gets) you should probably stick to saying that the Soviet system could not compete. If that is to be your argument i will but point out that the Soviet system was not 'competing' but doing it's best to survive in a very hostile capitalist controlled world.

Which still could not save it from its initial collapse.

Communism, is not necessarily a bad thing. As I look to the future with all the coming advances we will see, I think the human race is moving towards a communist type system, as we advance at our ever increasing exponential pace, technology will be the driving force in our transition (as we will rely greatly on robots along with other vital technology's which will see us through this transitional period). I also think that the term "superpower" will be somewhat obsolete in the future, especially considering the technological singularity, which could happen as early as 2030, thus making the position of superpowerdom, moot, as things will start to balance out among nations of the world.

[edit on 27-7-2008 by West Coast]

Originally posted by West Coast

Originally posted by StellarX
You where the one that felt it was important enough to mention the advent of 'stealth' somehow featuring in the 'defeat' of the USSR when such could clearly not be the case.

I know you have a soft spot towards Russia. But Russia is quite irrelevant on the world stage today. I will say my initial comment was taken a bit out of context (or wasn't explained particularly well on my part). Let me be clear here, Technologically, the soviets fell behind the Americans (This is even more relevant today, nearly two decades after the soviets stopped being competitive with America.)

Just do what Stellar asks and put out the proof.

[edit on 27-7-2008 by Lambo Rider]

The typical USA 1 syndrome common in the primate sub species

Originally posted by West Coast

Originally posted by StellarX
You where the one that felt it was important enough to mention the advent of 'stealth' somehow featuring in the 'defeat' of the USSR when such could clearly not be the case.

I know you have a soft spot towards Russia. But Russia is quite irrelevant on the world stage today. I will say my initial comment was taken a bit out of context (or wasn't explained particularly well on my part). Let me be clear here, Technologically, the soviets fell behind the Americans (This is even more relevant today, nearly two decades after the soviets stopped being competitive with America.)

Since 'communism' is such a loaded term( it means different things for different folks and the more ignorant the worse it gets) you should probably stick to saying that the Soviet system could not compete. If that is to be your argument i will but point out that the Soviet system was not 'competing' but doing it's best to survive in a very hostile capitalist controlled world.

Which still could not save it from its initial collapse.

Communism, is not necessarily a bad thing. As I look to the future with all the coming advances we will see, I think the human race is moving towards a communist type system, as we advance at our ever increasing exponential pace, technology will be the driving force in our transition (as we will rely greatly on robots along with other vital technology's which will see us through this transitional period). I also think that the term "superpower" will be somewhat obsolete in the future, especially considering the technological singularity, which could happen as early as 2030, thus making the position of superpowerdom, moot, as things will start to balance out among nations of the world.

[edit on 27-7-2008 by West Coast]

Americans couldn't build a wad of toilet paper right
their cars fall apart
as bad as the European cars except for German cars
Japan does all the heavy lifting in technology for the USA

as far as military equipment goes again you will find Canada and japan and GB do most of the technological jobs and designs
most if not all targeting devices are of Japanes design and build in the American arsenal

China now sucks the money out of America like a huge Vacum
and is building the Communist REd Chinese navy biggest in the world
with submarines the Americans can't even detect let alone defend against
The Astute Americans are quick to offer that they are the most advanced but this isnt correct
in some fields they are more advanced in others they are not.

jets Americans are no more advanced than Russia
submarines clearly the new red Chinese subs are years ahead in design.

While the American economy is broken in trying to keep up
the chinese can build new technology for 50 cents an hour in wages
Americans pay 30$ an hour and another 50$ in bribes and graft to get the same work done
making matters worse the Chinese have more geniuses than Americans have dumbos

Solo,

So much ignorance in one post of yours, it almost seems you are trying to appear fake. None of your points are intelligent or well-considered, they are merely the tired, memorized lines of a non-thinker.

Originally posted by solo1
as far as military equipment goes again you will find Canada and japan and GB do most of the technological jobs and designs
most if not all targeting devices are of Japanes design and build in the American arsenal.

Please, provide links to your ill-thought out screed of accusations. So far, you have shown nothing but ignorance.

Boeing, Lockheed Martin, and Northrop Grumman (Just to name a few) are all American company's who demand much of the bulk of Americas defense contracts, thus the coined term "The Military industrial complex". These are American company's, not British, and most certainly not any Japanese contractors. The fact you brought Canada into the debate shows the ignorance level I am dealing with in regards to the very little knowledge you have on the matter.

China now sucks the money out of America like a huge Vacum

I take it you are talking about the debt china holds?

In all honesty, China owns very little U.S. debt as a percentage of the GDP. China only owns less than 6% of all of the U.S.'s outstanding debt.
www.treas.gov...

As the graph below indicates, Americas outstanding debt is not at historic levels as a percentage of the GDP. Also, take notice of the downward trend of the debt?


The below graph shows just who owns Americas debt. (It clearly is not China who you overestimate in almost masturbatory terms.)

The Astute Americans are quick to offer that they are the most advanced but this isnt correct

32% of all the worlds Research & Development is done by the US.



The US also accounts for 27 % of all the worlds Scientists/Researchers.


Both of these graphs represent a true testament to overall US dominance in these very fields.

jets Americans are no more advanced than Russia
submarines clearly the new red Chinese subs are years ahead in design.

That is a pathetically weak attempt to confuse your own envious wishes with reality. Your opinion, thus, is unintelligent.

While the American economy is broken in trying to keep up

The US economy equals 30% of the worlds GDP, China equals 8% ( Russia is 2.5%). The US economy is 3 times larger than the next largest economy in the world, the Japanese economy. Again, a normal person would not interpret this data to mean that Japan has surpassed the US, let alone Russia and China.

the chinese can build new technology for 50 cents an hour in wages

And that "new" technology just so happens to be called "toys". (As that is a large chunk of the pie from the Chinese R&D budget.

Americans pay 30$ an hour and another 50$ in bribes and graft to get the same work done
making matters worse the Chinese have more geniuses than Americans have dumbos

This is why anti-Americans like you cannot be taken seriously. Everything you have said, you have done so with an opinion that is mired by falsehoods and inaccuracies of the actual facts, which contradict everything you have said. Anti-Americans such as yourself, often have to outright lie and misrepresent situations, and facts, in order to condemn America. If you would have restricted yourself to the actual facts, you would see that you have very little to support what is a severe case of fanatical hate.

I have already provided a source that indicate the US is responsible for 32-40% of all the worlds R&D spending, and has the most scientists and researchers of any single nation. There is a saying, the Americans innovate, the Japanese imitate, and the Chinese straight up steal it. It is no misconception that America is 15% more innovative that Japan. Furthermore, there is a brain drain into the United States (first world Europe cannot even keep their young, promising, aspiring scientists from flocking to the United States), not China, and in fact, many Chinese actually flock to the US mainland for a better education (17 of the worlds top 20 University's are located in the United States) a better way of life, and chance of being able to succeed in a free democracy.

There is a saying "The best defense against logic, is ignorance." (This clearly relates to you.)

Your emotional outbursts is typical of envious anti-Americans.

Overall, weak, weak, weak arguments on your part.


[edit on 27-7-2008 by West Coast]

Originally posted by Lambo Rider

Just do what Stellar asks and put out the proof.

I have provided a video from the Program Director of Los Alamos National Laboratory himself. A normal person would interpret that as enough evidence in itself.

Furthermore, I will not get into heated debates about a "has been" nation that collapsed two decades ago, as to whether they hold strategic arms advantage over a nation that is as powerful as America is today. Stellar should know exactly where I stand on this issue.

[edit on 27-7-2008 by West Coast]

Nonsense Russians are way behind the US because they have nothing to show for. It's like the stupid kid that likes to front about how much he makes, but drives a beater.

And don't tell me they are hiding their programs because everyone does, and the only reason why the US is upfront about their programs is because they have other black programs way more advance. If the Russians have yet to show anything means they don't have it or it's one of their secret projects, which means they are far behind the US.

[edit on 28-7-2008 by amfirst]

[edit on 28-7-2008 by amfirst]

[edit on 28-7-2008 by amfirst]

[edit on 28-7-2008 by amfirst]

[edit on 28-7-2008 by amfirst]

Originally posted by West Coast
I know you have a soft spot towards Russia. But Russia is quite irrelevant on the world stage today.

You have always held that opinion, for lack of any other method to refute the sources i use, but what would that matter if it were to be the case? How would me having one particular bias or another make Russian ICBMs and lasers disappear. Why is Russia irrelevant because it chooses not to use it's very real strategic and conventional weapons to terrorize third world nations?

I will say my initial comment was taken a bit out of context (or wasn't explained particularly well on my part). Let me be clear here, Technologically, the soviets fell behind the Americans (This is even more relevant today, nearly two decades after the soviets stopped being competitive with America.)

Everyone is paranoid about 'falling behind' in technology and while there is surely merit to keeping the gap as narrow as possible one does not need to be ahead in every field to successfully prosecute a war of either aggression or defense as the resistance of badly trained and armed citizen soldiers have proved throughout human history. I am as of yet unaware of the areas of science where the USSR were by the mid 80's ( you have to implement superior technology which does take time) so behind that they had to 'surrender' by basically granting formal independence to republics it always pretended had autonomy.

Which still could not save it from its initial collapse.

Depending on how much of a collapse it really was and how much of the social/economic upheavals were in fact intended.

Communism, is not necessarily a bad thing.

Neither is capitalism but there they were and here we are....

As I look to the future with all the coming advances we will see, I think the human race is moving towards a communist type system, as we advance at our ever increasing exponential pace, technology will be the driving force in our transition (as we will rely greatly on robots along with other vital technology's which will see us through this transitional period).

The area i am most concerned with is democracy and the bills of economic rights that must follow the implementation of true democracy. Efficient economic system will be designed to do the bidding of the people if only the people could gain the power of their countries resources by democratic control.

I also think that the term "superpower" will be somewhat obsolete in the future, especially considering the technological singularity, which could happen as early as 2030, thus making the position of superpowerdom, moot, as things will start to balance out among nations of the world.

And according to at least some the type of weapon you speak off have been around for forty years. I have in past provided you with information that in my mind strongly suggest that cities and entire countries have already suffered the consequences of the employment of such weapons.

The following is a great summary but not of much use until next month due to bandwidth constraints.

www.frank.germano.com...

The following you might remember but if not now is the time to reevaluate. My information pertaining to WOMD starts at around part three of that response.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Stellar

This thread has gotten so off topic it's not worth it anymore...

It all just had to boil down to a USA Vs. Russia thread in the end doesn't it?

Regardless of whether Russia pioneered laser weaponry in the 1970's or not, everyone's missing the bigger picture:

The future of this stuff. Direct Energy Weapons. Particle Beams, Plasma, Microwaves, etc...

If that's what Russia or the US were capable of the 70's then who knows what they've managed to keep under wraps today.

reply to post by CTPAX



No matter how much we'll talk about it, we'll know FOR SURE when a crazy guy launches a warhead on America or Russia. Well see what happens.

reply to post by CTPAX



No matter how much we'll talk about it, we'll know FOR SURE when a crazy guy launches a warhead on America or Russia. Well see what happens.

Originally posted by West Coast

Originally posted by Lambo Rider

Just do what Stellar asks and put out the proof.

I have provided a video from the Program Director of Los Alamos National Laboratory himself. A normal person would interpret that as enough evidence in itself.

Furthermore, I will not get into heated debates about a "has been" nation that collapsed two decades ago, as to whether they hold strategic arms advantage over a nation that is as powerful as America is today. Stellar should know exactly where I stand on this issue.

[edit on 27-7-2008 by West Coast]

WHAT YOU PROOVE IS THAT all YOU CAN DO IS TELL US TO TAKE YOUR WORD FOR IT, SCINCE YOU CAN'T PROVIDE THE SOURCES THAT PROOVE RUSSIA IS BEHIND IN WEAPONS SYSTEM!!
AND AGAIN

[edit on 28-7-2008 by Lambo Rider]

Originally posted by Lambo Rider

WHAT YOU PROOVE IS THAT all YOU CAN DO IS TELL US TO TAKE YOUR WORD FOR IT, SCINCE YOU CAN'T PROVIDE THE SOURCES THAT PROOVE RUSSIA IS BEHIND IN WEAPONS SYSTEM!!
AND AGAIN

[edit on 28-7-2008 by Lambo Rider]


Well, you have provided no proof that Russia is superior in anything. It swings both ways. What we do know that what the US has in service is superior in most regards to anything the Russians have. As weapons are becoming more and more high-tech the ability to pack more and more computing power into smaller and smaller spaces is the domain of the US, hence allowing the US to spearhead high-tech weapons.

You know Lambo Rider you have never provided proof of anything, you ust jump onto someone elses argument. Why don't you do some research for once.

Originally posted by StellarX
And according to at least some the type of weapon you speak off have been around for forty years. I have in past provided you with information that in my mind strongly suggest that cities and entire countries have already suffered the consequences of the employment of such weapons.

Erm yes, you did say that hurricane Katrina was the result of the French and Russians using weather weapons. You almost got laughed out of the forum for that one