It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Russia making contingents for Nuke attack

page: 1
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 29 2010 @ 04:15 PM
link   
I remember a previous thread titled "Is Russia preparing for Nuclear War " ?
From 2006.
Seems it was closed.
As with many European countries-Nuke shelters have been de-commissioned and sold off even on Ebay.
Moscow however seems its fitting to prepare.
The recent fires have shown the deep metro didnt offer total protection-the smoke still got there.Presumably radiation would do the same ?


rt.com...




posted on Aug, 29 2010 @ 04:51 PM
link   
reply to post by martin3030
 

That's interesting... and worrying!

5000 shelters, all at 14 meters underground, wouldnt come cheap. Why do the Russians feel like they have to make the investment?



posted on Aug, 29 2010 @ 06:56 PM
link   
I would rather worry about the actual battle plans that are waiting to get grabbed from the shelf they are waiting to be used.

There are some political struggles between Iran and Israel and if they escalate, the US and Russia will be forced to label each other enemy again. Lets just hope that when that happens there will be intelligent people making the decisions .



posted on Aug, 30 2010 @ 03:50 PM
link   
I was thinking that maybe it was Russia anticipating the need-but have become aware of their own heightened activities aside from the shelter plans.
These include massive investments in new submarines and ballistic missiles.
Increased activity with their Blackjack and Bear flights on Canada/Finland/UK borders.
Movements of S300 missiles to South Ossetia.
Heightened spying activity (In London its estimated there are now 3 times more Russian spies operating there than BEFORE Soviet collapse.)

And we though the cold war was over ??????????




[edit on 30-8-2010 by martin3030]



posted on Aug, 30 2010 @ 03:53 PM
link   
Sorry forgot about this....from this week;


www.telegraph.co.uk...



posted on Aug, 30 2010 @ 04:22 PM
link   
reply to post by martin3030
 


Why do the British have named their subs and stuff Viking like names ?

What's wrong with H.M.S. Charles or Blair, Brown. Union Jack ?
 


Spying really does happen more often then it did in the cold war. I think ths is something to put on our lists to worry about, and challenge it.


Russia

So the Russians are planning a war, or are they just catching up ?

They evidently realized a nuclear war would not be beneficial or they would have fired some nukes back in the cold war. When the USSR fell apart their navy has fallen behind.
Today they have new means and ways to play with the big boys again. So it is essential to know what your up against. Right ?

That would also mean that it is a harmless way to learn. And regain their status as super power. Only this time the whole world is at their feet instead of only communist nations.



posted on Aug, 30 2010 @ 04:24 PM
link   
reply to post by martin3030
 


That one was interesting, but it could also be that they just caught them out at the games all side have been playing for decades now.



posted on Aug, 30 2010 @ 04:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sinter Klaas

What's wrong with H.M.S. Charles or Blair, Brown. Union Jack ?


I cant imagine that 'HMS Tony Blair' would be a name that would 'shiver the timbers' of an enemy fleet.

The 'USS Ronald Reagan' is the epitome of a poorly thought out name - and this is the flagship of the US Navy!



posted on Aug, 30 2010 @ 05:19 PM
link   
There seems to be a lot of Russian activity in recent months.

They must know something is up. Maybe the Iran situation will flare up and they are preparing for their own participation there?


Edit: Grammarrrrghhh

[edit on 30-8-2010 by Tarrok]



posted on Aug, 30 2010 @ 05:31 PM
link   
reply to post by Tarrok
 

Good God please dont say that!

My paranoia is too far gone as it is!



posted on Aug, 30 2010 @ 06:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Silver Star
reply to post by Tarrok
 

Good God please dont say that!

My paranoia is too far gone as it is!


Psst... What's that behind you?



I certainly hope not, but all of these recent stories do get you wondering. However, it can also be seen as a natural product from USrael's posturing and demonizing towards Iran and their nuclear program. Russia is directly involved so anything happening will involve the Russians too.



posted on Aug, 31 2010 @ 07:53 AM
link   
The Russians would be more concerned about a terrorist group getting a hold of a nuke rather then any Nuclear confrontation with the USA . Russia is cutting back on its Nuclear Weapons stockpile in order to spend more on its conventional forces .

Cheers xpert11 .



posted on Aug, 31 2010 @ 08:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by xpert11
The Russians would be more concerned about a terrorist group getting a hold of a nuke rather then any Nuclear confrontation with the USA .

I don't see that as the case when they are providing
nuclear fuel rods to Iran knowing that Iran sponsors
terror entities like Hezbollah and Hamas.

That's like providing the Devil with a pitchfork.



posted on Aug, 31 2010 @ 08:31 AM
link   
reply to post by boondock-saint
 


My point still stands because the Russians would know that any Nuclear Weapons Iran gains would be used against Israel or its own population . No the Russians would be concerned about the likes of separatists in Chechnya getting a hold of a nuke or even if you stretch things out a bit say Georgia getting one or more nukes . The Separatist groups would be the Russians main concern .

Just my ten cents .



posted on Aug, 31 2010 @ 08:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by Silver Star

Originally posted by Sinter Klaas

What's wrong with H.M.S. Charles or Blair, Brown. Union Jack ?


I cant imagine that 'HMS Tony Blair' would be a name that would 'shiver the timbers' of an enemy fleet.



What about the HMS Maggie Thatcher?

It'd scare subs outta the water i reckon.



posted on Aug, 31 2010 @ 09:45 AM
link   
No one is going to start a nuclear war. Not officially anyway. A false flag with a mini nuke by our very own ABC agencies, maybe. Or a true blue fanatic terrorist group that some how miraculously obtains a mini nuke but that technology is not cheap and or easily constructed. SOMEONE is going to be behind it IF it happens. ANY time any nation even considers nuclear warfare its a risk to their infrastructure and control.

Just as no one seems to notice how and why the Taliban are still able to fight. It’s because SOMEONE is financing and supplying them. And its not other rogue terror cells, it has to be a nation’s government because the supplies and weapons to fund such a widespread campaign would have to be produced and distributed on a massive scale.

One misplaced nuke could throw off their agenda and set them back hundreds of years. Plus the real estate for the effected area is useless. Nuclear arms are merely a means of deterrence today. Not a viable or reasonable war tool.

Bioweaponry and chemical warfare is what we should be concerned with. Laboratory manufactured viruses in which are immune to everything; thus only the key players and puppet masters retain the antidotes and vaccines. The only way nukes would ever be used in a conventional war setting is if the user wanted total world destruction. Meaning everyone and everything dies. As screwed up as a lot of authority figures and politicians are, its hard to put someone that crazy in power. Plus its about control and power, not total destruction.



posted on Aug, 31 2010 @ 11:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by boondock-saint

Originally posted by xpert11
The Russians would be more concerned about a terrorist group getting a hold of a nuke rather then any Nuclear confrontation with the USA .

I don't see that as the case when they are providing
nuclear fuel rods to Iran knowing that Iran sponsors
terror entities like Hezbollah and Hamas.

That's like providing the Devil with a pitchfork.


Except the Russians are taking inventory of all spent fuel rods and handle all removal. The Iranians have no access to those elements. Furthermore, the IEAE's super strict rules are all being followed and complied with.

Unless there's a backdoor deal that you're aware of?



posted on Aug, 31 2010 @ 12:39 PM
link   
Many people still living the cold war within this thread.

Russia's biggest concern is the same as China's. It's not the USA, but radical Muslims. Look at Iran's rocket program and the range of their of their rockets. Moscow is under the gun.

Russia and Iran are allies... No they are business partners in business only. Russia needs money for it's economy. Iran sells oil. This is a marriage made in hell. Putin is much smarter than anyon gives him credit.

Everyone really needs to understand, Islam is on the march all across the planet. You don't have to believe me, just take the blinders off and look around yourself.



posted on Aug, 31 2010 @ 02:26 PM
link   
reply to post by hinky
 


Actually Russia has one of the biggest population of Muslims all together.
The Islam isn't new in Russia. It has been there for centuries.The only Russian Muslim terrorists that bother Moscow are from Chechnya. However their dispute is a political one. They want independence.



posted on Aug, 31 2010 @ 02:38 PM
link   
reply to post by xpert11
 



Maybe it has cut back,but there is continuing upgading of existing stockpiles.
It has a programme for upgade for its delivery systems.
It has developed and introduced new IBMs.
All the searches on the internet I have made,indicate that Russias stockpiles actually exceed those of the US.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join