New START Treaty

All Russia has to do now is make majority of their warheads nuclear. Cruise missiles, ballistic missiles, etc. And reserve those for when needed. Of course build also more conventional for those regional conflicts.

kvs wrote:This yanqui move is going to cost it big time.   Removing the lid off nuclear weapons both global and regional means that MAD is at 100%.   The insanity of the yanqui
self-anointed exceptionalists is something to behold.   They have actually tied their own hands with this move.

They just wanted excuses to allow the treaty to expire, even the pathetic ones they got after pretending to engage in negotiations for a few months. So mission accomplished for them. In their mind they are just sparing Russians their lives by tolerating any arm control treaty, they are going to have fun when they see China and Russia leave them behind despite all their attempts to "outspend them into oblivion"... what f* retards

I have a question: do you think breeder reactors give Russia an advantage now or do US and the RF have enough weapons-grade plutonium ready for increasing their number of warheads?

kvs wrote:I think they do.  The US cannot possibly have the plutonium production reactors it had operating 40 years ago.   That is one of the reasons they store
warheads instead of dismantling them.    Carter killed any US reprocessing capacity and any fast neutron breeder reactor program the US had.   And
as we see with Westinghouse, the resulting loss of human capital is a real show stopper.

Russia is number one on the planet with nuclear reprocessing.   It can probably come up with new types of fission cores for hydrogen bombs.

For sure Russia can crank up warhead production like there is no tomorrow and it does not have to go "bankrupt" to do.   The yanquis will
have to spin up production basically from scratch.   So it is Yanquistan that could end up going bankrupt first, before the race even starts.

What US has not seen or rather didn't want to see is that Russia has been steadily preparing for decades in order to be ready for exactly this moment. They never abandoned their strategic technologies like nuclear research, they patiently took their soviet weapons programs where they were left and took hem to new heights. They didn't rush to use force despite many provocations because that would have spent their resources before they had been properly regenerated. That kind of long-term planning is something the West cannot only not replicate but I think it cannot even understand.

LMFS wrote:

kvs wrote:This yanqui move is going to cost it big time.   Removing the lid off nuclear weapons both global and regional means that MAD is at 100%.   The insanity of the yanqui
self-anointed exceptionalists is something to behold.   They have actually tied their own hands with this move.

They just wanted excuses to allow the treaty to expire, even the pathetic ones they got after pretending to engage in negotiations for a few months. So mission accomplished for them. In their mind they are just sparing Russians their lives by tolerating any arm control treaty, they are going to have fun when they see China and Russia leave them behind despite all their attempts to "outspend them into oblivion"... what f* retards

I have a question: do you think breeder reactors give Russia an advantage now or do US and the RF have enough weapons-grade plutonium ready for increasing their number of warheads?

Looks like the Chinese made the first move:

#China's top legislature passed a law on export control, allowing the government to ban exports of strategic materials and advanced technology to specific foreign companies.
https://twitter.com/Russ_Warrior/status/1318526455643578369

EU calls on Russia and USA to prolong New START before February 2021

Moscow has repeatedly called on Washington not to delay prolongation of the treaty it describes as a golden standard in the area of disarmament

BRUSSELS, October 20. /TASS/. The EU is calling on Russia and the USA to prolong the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START) before February 2021, EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Josep Borrell stated on Tuesday during a plenary session of the European Parliament in Brussels.

"We strongly call for the extension by the US and Russia of the New START Treaty before February 2021, and we will encourage negotiations for a broader future agreement," he said.

The New START Treaty will expire at the beginning of 2021 unless Moscow and Washington agree to renew it. 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) 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 will remain in force for 10 years, until February 5, 2021, unless it is replaced before that date by a subsequent agreement on the reduction and limitation of strategic offensive arms. It can also be extended for no longer than 5 years (that is, until 2026) by the parties’ mutual consent.

Moscow has repeatedly called on Washington not to delay prolongation of the treaty it describes as a golden standard in the area of disarmament. In an interview with the Financial Times in June 2019, Russian President Vladimir Putin warned that once the New START Treaty ceased to exist, "then there would be no instrument in the world to curtail the arms race.".

https://tass.com/defense/1214405

The INF treaty was Russias fault for not violating it and not wanting to leave that treaty, so what the EU says means nothing really... they can squeal and bleat all they like but the US is happy to ignore its west european partners... their view means nothing at all...

There is a tiny window of opportunity if Biden gets elected he could agree to an extension, but the civil war that starts no matter who loses will probably totally distract them anyway...  


The US will demand other Russian weapons get classed as strategic including Kinzhal and Zircon and will refuse to include long range HALE and MALE UAVs.

I would think the new START is dead and nothing will replace it any time soon.

Terminal guidance with the new Russian weapons means conventional warheads can be standard for many targets anyway...


BTW would add that less than 2 months after the INF treaty was backed out of the US tested Tomahawk missiles from an AEGIS Ashore launcher like they said could not be done... liars....

@Arrow... offering to freeze warhead numbers for one year is nothing.

There is no way the Americans will agree with anything anyway, so it would only be a one year delay to nothing.

Russia wont tell the US how many tactical nukes they have and I doubt that will change any time soon... why should they tell them?

New START is less important than the INF treaty so it really does not matter now... the US will probably make a lot more nuclear weapons and Russia will make a few more as well.

The Chinese will likely make more too...

UK doesn't have many nukes.

Doesn't take many either to destroy UK.

So their boasting is asinine.

Hence why Russia needs to build more nukes.

kvs wrote:...Russia should make the extension conditional on inclusion of the UK and France as part of the US strategic nuclear weapons pool.

Let them eat some Pompeo cake and see how they like it.

Agreed

I think this might be included in new requirements

START is stupid treaty anyway and this is a good opportunity to get UK and France into this or ditch it permanently