New START Treaty

The tactical nukes is a response to US INF treaty non obligation and thus should be the response. Russia should say - we will only agree if you send all 150 nukes back into USA, and written agreement that you will not place IRBM's and SRBM's in eastern Europe. If you do not comply, we do not agree.

That way the US is now forced to make concessions. They won't so Russia can just say "it's your fault USA".

Well that is an interesting start, but I would say no.

I would say that the Soviet Union withdrew all its military forces from Warsaw Pact countries so the US should remove all US forces and installations from all NATO and EU countries and then Russia will talk about limits on tactical nuclear weapons... otherwise when the INF treaty expires new hypersonic IRBMs are going to be developed and produced for the Russian Navy and land bases around Europe... ready in case they are needed...

Bolton says it's dead... more or less.

Either he gets the boot or by 2021 the theatrics will be off the charts.

Kremlin says refusal to prolong New START will be harmful for strategic stability

The Moscow-Washington strategic arms reduction treaty will expire in 2021

MOSCOW, August 26. /TASS/. Possible refusal to prolong the treaty on the reduction of strategic offensive weapons New START will leave humanity without a single agreement in this field, Russian presidential spokesman Dmitry Peskov told the media on Monday.

"The consequences for strategic stability will be rather harmful. It goes without saying that strategic stability will be affected at the general, global level, because in fact all of us - I mean humanity - will be left without a single agreement that would govern this field," Peskov said when asked about the likely effects of the decision not to prolong the New START Treaty.

Peskov expressed regret there had been no messages from the United States to date if Washington was prepared or unprepared to discuss the prolongation of this treaty. He recalled that at a meeting with US President Donald Trump earlier Russian President Vladimir Putin suggested entering into negotiations on this issue, "but there has been no signals [in response to this proposal] either way."

The Moscow-Washington strategic arms reduction treaty will expire in 2021. It can be prolonged for a period of five years. On July 31, US presidential national security adviser John Bolton said that the New START was unlikely to be prolonged, but for the time being the Washington Administration had made no decisions on that score.

https://tass.com/politics/1075019

Russia ready to extend New START by year-end without any preconditions, says Putin

The head of state recalled that the treaty would expire soon, and "we have so far received no response from our partners"

SOCHI, December 5. /TASS/. Russia is ready to extend the New START Treaty by the end of the year without any preconditions, Russian President Vladimir Putin said at a meeting on defense issues.

"Let me reiterate Russia’s stance. Russia is ready to extend the New START Treaty without delay, as soon as possible, before the end of this year without any preconditions. I say that formally to ensure that there is no double or triple interpretation of our stance," Putin said.

The head of state recalled that the treaty would expire soon. "All our proposals regarding the extension the New START Treaty are on the table. We have so far received no response from our partners," Putin said.
New START Treaty

The Treaty between the United States of America and the Russian Federation on Measures for the Further Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms (the New START Treaty) was signed in 2010 and entered into force on February 5, 2011.

The document stipulates that seven years after its entry into effect each party should have no more than a total of 700 deployed intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBM), submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBM) and strategic bombers, as well as no more than 1,550 warheads on deployed ICBMs, deployed SLBMs and strategic bombers, and a total of 800 deployed and non-deployed ICBM launchers, SLBM launchers and strategic bombers.

The New START Treaty obliges the parties to exchange information on the number of warheads and carriers twice a year.

The New START Treaty will remain in force for 10 years until February 5, 2021, unless superseded by a subsequent agreement. It may be extended for a period of no more than five years (that is, until 2026) upon the parties’ mutual consent.

Moscow has repeatedly called on Washington not to delay the issue of the Treaty’s possible prolongation.

https://tass.com/defense/1096269

Arrow wrote:

https://www.militarynews.ru/Story.asp?rid=1&nid=523048&lang=RU

So there will be no poseidon and Burevestnik...

Your laugh would have had a point if this was stated by Putin himself. A retired major general personal opinion doesn't mean much here.

Arrow wrote:https://www.militarynews.ru/Story.asp?rid=1&nid=523048&lang=RU

So there will be no poseidon and Burevestnik...
Mindstorm wrote that the Russian leadership is not as stupid as Gorbachev. They seem to be just as stupid as Gorbachev, heheh

Until now absolute lie

Russia may freeze development of Poseidon to conclude new START treaty: military expert

12/05/2019 7:00:00

Geneva. 5th of December. INTERFAX - Russia may freeze the development of weapons with a nuclear propulsion system if it is needed to conclude a new strategic offensive arms treaty, retired Major General Vladimir Dvorkin, former head of the 4th Central Research Institute of the Russian Defense Ministry, told Interfax.
There will be no Poseidons and Petrels in the coming years. And if they do not fit into the framework of the treaty, then I do not exclude that Russia may compromise and freeze work on these types of weapons so that it would be possible to conclude a treaty, "said Dvorkin, answering the question of whether adoption could armament of these complexes will prevent the conclusion of a new treaty on strategic offensive arms.

Just his opinion.

One of the forum rules is not trolling...

dino00 wrote:

Arrow wrote:https://www.militarynews.ru/Story.asp?rid=1&nid=523048&lang=RU

So there will be no poseidon and Burevestnik...
Mindstorm wrote that the Russian leadership is not as stupid as Gorbachev. They seem to be just as stupid as Gorbachev, heheh

Until now absolute lie

Russia may freeze development of Poseidon to conclude new START treaty: military expert

12/05/2019 7:00:00

      Geneva. 5th of December. INTERFAX - Russia may freeze the development of weapons with a nuclear propulsion system if it is needed to conclude a new strategic offensive arms treaty, retired Major General Vladimir Dvorkin, former head of the 4th Central Research Institute of the Russian Defense Ministry, told Interfax.
      There will be no Poseidons and Petrels in the coming years. And if they do not fit into the framework of the treaty, then I do not exclude that Russia may compromise and freeze work on these types of weapons so that it would be possible to conclude a treaty, "said Dvorkin, answering the question of whether adoption could armament of these complexes will prevent the conclusion of a new treaty on strategic offensive arms.

Just his opinion.

One of the forum rules is not trolling...

Good luck in getting the mods to actually do their duty by actually warning him for his trolling.

There won't be new START anyway. US leaders see China as the most dangerous enemy so they won't limit themselves by a treaty with Russia while China has free hands to develop anything in secret.

The most most dangerous thing is that, just like China, US doesn't seem to want a START that includes China neither but be free to develop as much weapons as they can. Pretty dangerous IMO.

Arrow wrote:https://expert.ru/2020/01/14/sistema-kontrolya-nad-snv---eto-trup-kotoryij-nevozmozhno-ozhivit/

What are you think about this article? It is true that the author is right that START will not be submitted. He also claims that the US still has the most powerful nuclear arsenal and can increase it very quickly.

With no facilities to produce the needed plutonium, nope.

Plus no, they dont have the most powerful nuclear weapons.  So the expert is a moron.  Much like yourself.  US has basic ICBM's that fly a basic trajectory.  Russia has quasi ballistic missiles so that is already a major up. Plus their comments about submarines is hilarious cause Borei hasn't been spotted regardless what US claim because they provided no evidence an their claim they spotted all of them is a joke since they aren't based in same area. But hey, Americans love fantasy, see marvel.

So eat shit.

Because of choices made by the US Russia is now able to introduce progressively more powerful and mobile ABM systems that would have been banned by the ABM treaty... the larger missiles of the S-400 would have violated that treaty but also S-500 and the various upgrades of the Moscow ABM system would also be violations because the new models are all mobile.

Russian air defences are the best in the world and are getting better all the time, and because the Americans have been talking about ABM systems for a few decades now they also have adapted all their new designed weapons to be used in situations where ABM systems are present.

These two facts alone count against the US and render the US forces to be in a much worse situation at the moment than the Russians because they both have been complying with the new Start treaty so have very similar numbers of warheads and delivery systens.

The US has not be destroying the warheads it has been building, but storing them, while old soviet warheads have been reduced in enrichment level and used in US nuclear power stations as fuel... which the US paid Russia for...

In the short term the US could certainly gain an advantage in pure numbers over Russia simply by building more missiles... though I don't know how recently they produced any strategic missiles and how easily they could be put back in to production, but they certainly have old model dumb warheads they could fit to missiles in an attempt to simply overwhelm the Russian defences.

Their obvious problem is that Russia is entering a new age of using breeder reactors to generate electricity and one of the features of such a reactor it the ability to place depleted uranium rods around the nuclear pile to enrich them... in peace time they can be enriched to allow the spent rods to be reused as fuel in a reactor... so they can sell it as fuel to customers... during times of tensions or with no treaty in place and wanting to stockpile some warheads they can enrich it to weapon grade level if they want, so the process of generating electricity can be used to make weapons fairly quickly as more reactors come on line...

So yeah, the Americans could use the lack of a treaty in force to increase numbers pretty rapidly but the increased numbers are just simple basic warheads that can be intercepted by the S-500 fairly easily and could probably be intercepted by S-400 as well... using radars and command modules developed for the S-500 system...

The Russians have missiles designed to penetrate US defences and are currently capable of doing so at will... increased production of these weapons wont break their budget, but will ensure the US gets a more even radiation coverage should anything start...

kvs wrote:

George1 wrote:Russia ready to extend New START, but US does not seek fair dialogue - Medvedev

No more Grobie style 5th column sacrifices.   If the yanquis want cheats, then they should have nothing.

The fact that the Trump administration insists on China joining it was the death nail for the treaty.....why would China join a treaty to reduce it's warheads and ICBM's when it already has 1/10th the warheads the U.S. has, and a small fraction of the ICBM's the U.S. has? Why isn't the U.S. insisting on it's allies Israel, the U.K., France to join the treaty? Don't let the fraudulent narratives fool anyone!

Including NATO.

Just demand France and the UK and Israel have to join too.... they will never agree to that...

Top Russian diplomat backs New START extension in call with Pompeo

MOSCOW, May 6. /TASS/. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has had a phone call with US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and supported the idea to extend the New Start nuclear arms reduction treaty, the Russian foreign ministry said in a statement on Wednesday.

"Opinions were exchanged on the issue of global security. <…> Lavrov again backed extension of the New START treaty that expires in February 2021. Ways to reenergize the Russian-US dialogue on arms control and non-proliferation were reviewed, considering the factors affecting the strategic stability," the ministry noted.

In addition, the chief diplomats also discussed the coronavirus pandemic. "In the context of fighting the coronavirus pandemic, issues relating to the cooperation of the two countries in this sphere were discussed, considering the need for all members of the international community to join efforts and in accordance with calls of the UN leadership as well as other multilateral organizations," the diplomatic agency stressed. Some other current issues were touched upon, including the UN Security Council work, cooperation prospects in the spheres of economy, counterterrorism and cyber security, the Russian ministry added.

The minister and the secretary also highlighted the importance of the upcoming 75th anniversary of the Second World War victory for preserving the historic memory about the feat of the anti-Hitler’s coalition states.

The call was held at the US initiative.


https://tass.com/defense/1153633

So in other words they will most likely quietly sign off on the extension clause in the agreement and leave negotiating a new treaty to later on...

You people do realise that letting the us missile programs stagnate and die over time by avoiding any large scale overt arms races will alow Russia to continue improving thier missiles at a grater rate than if they needed them right now and in huge numbers.

If Russia juts sits there quietly and focusses on the development of new weapons while actively maintaining the west's delusions of superiority Russia will eventually have total nuclear superiority and the west will no longer know how to even design one part of a new missile being forced to forever rely on updated missiles from the 1970s.

On the other hand if there was a nuclear arms race the Russian economy would suffer and maybe even get to 1990s levels.