March 4th, 2018.
Putin, former head of the KGB wouldn’t give a second thought to sending his own people to Lubyanka State prison or their Gulag’s where them daily endure hard labor until their deaths.
There is an additional upside to this story.
Vladimir Putin is taking a much more measured approach, going back to a cold war footing.
If Muslim Jihadist could have pounded the U.S. , they would have done so.
For those who are still living:
Nest stop the gulags of Siberia await.
Something didn’t sit well when I heard the propaganda driven speech delivered by Putin.
My apology, I didn’t check Global Research ownership an political until now.
But the US hasn’t simply been surpassed by superior Russian missile technology. The Russian missiles in question violate the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF), one of the most successful disarmament treaties of all time.
H/T from David the Differentiator
Interesting that the MSM is fishing for information about America’s capabilities in the delivery and existence of nuclear weapons.
Just to balance out the “THREAT” of war, America has a very up-to-date submarine fleet that is on constant patrol all over the world.
America’s nuclear submarines and the most sophisticated ever developed and far surpass any other nation’s.
The “Cold War Balance” has always been concerned with the retaliatory response to any given nation starting a nuclear war.
Simply Google this topic and the truth will become known.
I did please reads what follows.
The Backbone of Strategic Deterrence
Guided Missile Submarines (SSGN)
Precision From Beneath
Deep Submergence Rescue Vehicles (DSRV)
The Sub Fleet’s Life Vest
See how they differ here: (Source)
Looking back at the Obama Administration we notice that this Muslim fool actually began dismantling America’s nuclear warheads.
This effort was blocked by various Military leaders by slowing down the project waiting for Obama to be out of office.
Trump has made great progress in pushing back on this foolish Obama policy.
North Korea is well aware that any action by them would result in no more North Korea. Of course, America keeps a close eye on the various Military activities in North Korea.
Essentially, the INF prevented the denuclearization of Europe in the 1980s.
The new Russian cruise missiles can strike anywhere in Europe from Russia with a nuclear payload, according to experts who spoke with Business Insider.
However, defending against cruise missiles is extremely difficult, as they fly fast and close to the surface, meaning radars usually can’t find them among the bumps and obstructions in the earth’s terrain.
Defending against cruise missiles across an entire continent would require airborne detection and tracking — a costly solution.
Instead, the US may opt to return to its original posture that scared the Russians away from intermediate range nuclear missiles in the first place.
On Thursday, President Donald Trump tweeted that “The United States must greatly strengthen and expand its nuclear capability until such time as the world comes to its senses regarding nukes.”
At the presidential debates, Trump said “Russia has been expanding their” nuclear weapons, adding that “they have a much newer capability than we do.”
But according to Dr. Jeffrey Lewis, the founding publisher of Arms Control Wonk, although Russia may have updated its missiles and warheads more recently, the idea that Moscow has better capabilities is “almost certainly not true.”
But fears that Russia has surpassed the US in nuclear ferocity are not completely unfounded. On paper, newer, more complicated, more fearsome weapons comprise Russia’s nuclear arsenal.
Russia’s RS-24 Yars Intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM), introduced in the mid 2000s, can strike anywhere in the US with what some report to be ten independently targetable nuclear warheads.
These ten warheads would reenter the earth’s atmosphere at hypersonic speeds, around 5 miles a second. China has developed a similar platform, and the US simply has no way to defend against a salvo of such devastating nukes.
In comparison, the US’s Minuteman III ICBM also reenters the atmosphere at hypersonic speeds, but carries just one warhead, and was introduced in the 1970s.
But the question of whose are better is more a philosophical one than a straight comparison of capabilities.
Lewis says that US Strategic Command leaders, who command the US’s nuclear arsenal, have said for decades that given the choice between the US’s nukes and Russia’s they’d choose our own missiles every time.
In an interview with Business Insider, Lewis said that the US’s arsenal, while it lacks the potential to devastate and lay waste to whole continents, much better fits the US’s strategic needs.
Russia’s arsenal vs. the US’s
“Russians made a really different design choice than we did,” when it came to building ICBMs, said Lewis.
“Russia built nuclear weapons that are incremental improvements,” or weapons that would need updating every decade or so.
On the other hand, Lewis said, “US nukes are like Ferraris: beautiful, intricate, and designed for high performance.
Experts have said the plutonium pits will last for 100s of years.” Indeed the US’s stocks of Minuteman III ICBMS, despite their age, are “exquisite machinery, incredible things.”
“Russia’s nuclear weapons are newer, true, but they reflect the design philosophy that says ‘No reason to make it super fancy because we’ll just rebuild it in 10 years.'”
The philosophical differences don’t end there.
“Russians love to put missiles on trucks,” said Lewis, while the US prefer land-based silos, which present a reliable target and lack mobility.
During the height of the Cold War, the US did at one point try a truck-launched ICBM, but US safety and durability requirements far exceeded that of the Russians rendering the platform unreasonable.
“If you look at the truck [the US] built for missiles, its ten times more expensive. It’s radiation hardened and way less vulnerable,” explained Lewis. “We gold-plated the thing,” he joked.
“[The US] can’t do things the Russians did because we’re not going to put missiles on a crappy truck,” said Lewis.
Meanwhile, the Russian philosophy relies on clandestine activity and achieving a threat without breaking the bank.
“Good luck trying to find it, it doesn’t have to be gold-plated,” Lewis said of the Russian’s idea of missile trucks.
“[The US] like things that are reliable, things that can be maintained, things that you have to really train people to do,” explained Lewis. This difference stems from the people who form the US military, and how they differ from the Russians.
“Non-Commissioned Officers are the core of [the US] military,” said Lewis. “They’ve been around a long time. That’s why we’re way better than the Russians, who still have conscripts.”
It’s that professionalism at the core of the US military that makes America a different kind of world power. We prefer accuracy over destructive capability.
“We love accuracy.” Lewis says the US’s ideal nuke is “a tiny little nuclear weapon we’ll fly right through the window and blow up the building.” Meanwhile, the Russians would rather put 10 warheads on the building and level the whole city, civilians and all.
“You see it in Syria, that’s how they show it off,” Lewis said of Russia’s air campaign in Syria, where Moscow has been accused of using cluster bombs, incendiary munitions, and indiscriminately bombing hospitals and refugee camps. This careless and brutal attitude is a defining trait of Russia’s military.
For instance, Russia’s leaked Status 6 nuclear “doomsday” weapon, a “robotic mini-submarine” that can make 100 knots with a range of 6,200 miles is a nuclear-armed dirty bomb.
The bomb would not only nuke, but turn the waters around a harbor radioactive for years to come.
The US never even considers this kind of devastation, and they don’t want to.
Russia’s nuclear ambitions, as shown in its nuclear arms, are “deeply deeply deeply immoral,” says Lewis.
“We need to remind Russians why they wanted this treaty in the first place,” said Lewis, who explained that the Russians quickly abandoned their intermediate-range nuclear forces when it became clear that the US would respond in kind.
“That’s why [the US are] the good guys.”
First, the US should continue to press Russia to comply with the treaty, and as an important second, the US should “start a lot of programs to scare the hell out of the Russians,” like conventional cruise missile systems across Europe that could return fire should Moscow ever let one of its banned missiles fly in anger.
A different video.
We wanted the treaty because we didn’t want” the Russian intermediate range missile systems, said Lewis. “But can you imagine the horrifying things we can put in Poland?” (Source)
Thus the treaty signed by John Kerry at the behest of Obama is illegal. (Source)
For his part, Kerry isn’t called “Dumber than a box of rocks without good reason.
To enter into a treaty with a foreign state or organization, 2/3 of the U.S. Senate would have had to vote yes.
It was another Obama run around as no vote was ever taken by the United States Senate.