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.

 

Inside the Ring: Russia builds up, U.S. down

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 2 2013 @ 01:11 PM
link   

As the Obama administration prepares to launch a new round of strategic nuclear missile cuts, Russia’s strategic nuclear forces are undergoing a major modernization, according to U.S. officials. Read more: www.washingtontimes.com... Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter



Russia's military announced last month that as part of the nuclear buildup, Moscow later this year will deploy the first of its new intercontinental ballistic missiles called the Yars-M. Read more: www.washingtontimes.com... Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter


History repeats Reagan built up our forces only for Clinton to reduced them Bush built up our forces only for Obama to reduce them.

Russia, and the rest of the world modernizes,build's up their military's oh no Americans social engineering is more important than rocket engineering.

Of course it's only a matter of time before China steals it, who is also building up their military hell the only people who aren't is America.

Expect a major world paradigm shift within the next decade for those who like to think the US is a super power?

Have not been in a long,long time.

Guess the current fearless leader has a problem with providing for the common defense without there is nothing else.




posted on May, 2 2013 @ 01:16 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


Neither should have nuclear weapons in the first place.

NO ONE should have nuclear anything.



posted on May, 2 2013 @ 01:22 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


Did nobody tell you the Cold War is over?

But don't worry. We still have enough Nukes to blow up the world several times over.



posted on May, 2 2013 @ 01:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by VaterOrlaag
reply to post by neo96
 


Neither should have nuclear weapons in the first place.

NO ONE should have nuclear anything.



They do, and there will always be those who want to be "cool", and have them.



posted on May, 2 2013 @ 01:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by BritofTexas
reply to post by neo96
 


Did nobody tell you the Cold War is over?

But don't worry. We still have enough Nukes to blow up the world several times over.


So what part of this:


Details of the missile are being kept secret, but it has been described as a fifth-generation strategic nuclear system that Russian officials say will be able to penetrate U.S. missile defenses using a new type of fuel that requires a shorter burn time for booster engines. Read more: www.washingtontimes.com... Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter


Is someone missing?

The cold war is over?

Tell the Russian who are designing ICBM's to evade missile defense systems that.



posted on May, 2 2013 @ 01:40 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


From your source.


Russian officials say will be able to penetrate U.S. missile defenses


When what the Russian official actually said was..


"...we achieve the most complex part of the rocket boost so fast that the enemy does not have time to calculate its trajectory and, therefore, cannot destroy it,”


For now we have a fear mongering piece from the Washington Times.

Does Russia even have the funds for such an enterprise? Putin seems to be spending all their cash on the Olympic Village.



posted on May, 2 2013 @ 01:46 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


Speaking of paradigms?



Guess the current fearless leader has a problem with providing for the common defense without there is nothing else.


Have you considered that 'providing for the common defense' might not, any longer, concern methods of warfare and their implementation that would be meaningful to you? Especially with your head in the 80's with Reagan?

In the 1980's William S. Lind and his research team were funded by the U.S. military to create a conceptual framework for understanding how warfare was changing in the world, and how it had changed throughout history.

Lind and his team produced the concept of Generational Warfare. For instance, the hallmark of Third-Generation Warfare is focused on, "using speed and surprise to bypass the enemy's lines and collapse their forces from the rear. Essentially, this was the end of linear warfare on a tactical level, with units seeking not simply to meet each other face to face but to outmaneuver each other to gain the greatest advantage."

And, of course, that required greater levels of mechanization.

We are currently existing in a Fourth-Generational Warfare paradigm, and some researchers suggest that we are bridging in to a 5th generation (or gradient ) of warfare.

Here is how 4th gradient/generational warfare is described.




The simplest definition includes any war in which one of the major participants is not a state but rather a violent non-state actor. Classical examples, such as the slave uprising under Spartacus or the assassination of Julius Caesar by members of the Roman senate, predate the modern concept of warfare and are examples of this type of conflict.

Fourth generation warfare is defined as conflicts which involve the following elements:

-Are complex and long term
-Terrorism (tactic)
-A non-national or transnational base –highly decentralized
-A direct attack on the enemy's culture[clarification needed]
-Highly sophisticated psychological warfare, especially through media manipulation and lawfare
-All available pressures are used – political, economic, social and military
-Occurs in low intensity conflict, involving actors from all networks
-Non-combatants are tactical dilemmas
-Lack of hierarchy
-Small in size, spread out network of communication and financial support
-Use of Insurgency and guerrilla tactics

en.wikipedia.org...


In 5th gradient/generational warfare, well, stuff like narrative, context, emotion and perception become targets.

So, taking all of that in to consideration, how would you know it if our government were not 'providing for the common defense'? How would any citizen, if they do not understand what context to place what they are observing and experiencing in?

If folks don't know about this stuff, they don't even have the language to describe it.

So, how can anyone say, for instance, that the NSA hiring over 50,000 network security pros is not a more effective form of weapons escalation in today's 4th-5th gradient world than recruiting more infantry and building and implementing more mechanization?

America is not down, we have been re-tooling.


edit on 2-5-2013 by Bybyots because:




posted on May, 2 2013 @ 01:51 PM
link   
reply to post by Bybyots
 





Have you considered that 'providing for the common defense' might not, any longer, concern methods of warfare and their implementation that would be meaningful to you? Especially with your head in the 80's with Reagan?


Over 5000 years of warfare between men, and nation states show the validity of 'providing for the common defense'.

Mankind hasn't changed why anyone thinks current civilization is so 'enlightened' is beyond ludicrous.



posted on May, 2 2013 @ 01:53 PM
link   
reply to post by BritofTexas
 





For now we have a fear mongering piece from the Washington Times.


Funny the Washington Times isn't the one who build Icm's capable of carrying 10 nuclear warheads out of fear.



posted on May, 2 2013 @ 01:53 PM
link   
US constantly modernizes our ICBMS and all our other weapons and aircraft as technology advances. They are getting modified all the time, day to day, year to year with updated technology. Russia playing catch up.



posted on May, 2 2013 @ 01:59 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 





Over 5000 years of warfare between men, and nation states show the validity of 'providing for the common defense'.


I didn't say that it did not need to be provided for. I am saying that it is being provided for, but you would not be able to recognize how if you do not know what is going on.



Mankind hasn't changed why anyone thinks current civilization is so 'enlightened' is beyond ludicrous.


I did not say that mankind is enlightened, and neither did William Lind. How could anyone possibly argue that the networked technology has not changed everything?

Anyhow, if you find the information useful, that's great.




posted on May, 2 2013 @ 02:04 PM
link   
I suppose you work on the inside and know every single secret weapon in the U.S. arsenal. Or have you honestly made yourself believe every single weapon or bit of research done by the U.S. military is disclosed with the world.

All I'm reading is, Russia is modernizing because they say so, U.S. is lagging behind because there isn't information to disprove my assumption that they are.



posted on May, 2 2013 @ 02:11 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


The US government released a report 5 months ago showing concern over Russian short range nukes.
I posted this on a thread I made last week when I happened upon an active artillery piece capable of delivering tactical nuke warheads that is for sale.


During the Senate debate on the new U.S.-Russian Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START) in 2010, many Members noted that this treaty did not impose any limits on nonstrategic,or shorter-range, nuclear weapons. Many also noted that Russia possessed a far greater number of these shorter-range systems than did the United States. Some expressed particular concerns about the threat that Russian nonstrategic nuclear weapons might pose to U.S. allies in Europe; others argued that these weapons might be vulnerable to theft or sale to nations or groups seeking their own nuclear weapons.


www.fas.org

So not only is Russia developing new delivery systems but they are also being sneaky with the current disarmament treaties.



posted on May, 2 2013 @ 02:13 PM
link   
Calm down. It's funny how Russian propaganda works. )) No one in Russia believes in this chat.

As I posted before in other threads, EVEN IF something great appears in the minds of Russians engineers, 90% of money will end up in someone's pocket, 10% will be enough to complete a proper paperwork to 'close' a research process. I don't know if the huge corruption Serdukov Case appeared in the western news, but if it did, you'll understand what I mean.

You can't imagine the level of devastation in Russian military engineering. I see it every working day. We would like to compete with US military system or 'threat' the West but nowdays the best we can do is selling ourselves to China, India, Brazil etc.



posted on May, 2 2013 @ 02:18 PM
link   
Good. Since we're obviously not going to do anything about our ignorant culture and mindset in regard to other nations and peoples I'm glad someone else is tooling up their military to put another check and balance on the US. It'd be nice if we could have 2 or 3 more countries give us a run for our money in military technology. But Russia will do.



new topics

top topics



 
1

log in

join