GarryB wrote:Which is secret code for they don't want any agreements on strategic nuclear weapons... because they don't care.
The main thing these agreements are supposed to achieve is stability and peace and saving money that would otherwise be wasted on a stupid and unnecessary arms race... but an arms race is about spending money and there is no country you want to go up against when the rules are the one that spends the most money wins... because America will beat you every time.
The thing is that currently things are in a special place... Russia can make cruise missiles able to reach the US from any direction, and their ICBMs and SLBMs can be fitted with warheads to evade existing and near future defences, so obviously the priority of ICBMs and SLBMs will be to take out any defences like major radars and ABM systems and population areas and of course food sources, while the follow up strikes of cruise missiles can hit more population centres till the cows come home not to mention underwater drones that also deliver death.
The question is cost, but the Russians can be clever... make their missiles cheap and simple and very accurate... they can build IRBMs to reach targets in europe, but make them able to carry both nuke and conventional warheads so they can use them on their ships and submarines in their UKSK-M launchers.... they can make them in large numbers and store them on Russian territory with nuke warheads ready to use at a moments notice, but also send them off to sea with conventional warheads... the volume they could make them in would make them rather cheap, yet scramjet propulsion makes them difficult targets to defend against, and of course with conventional warheads they would be rather useful tools for enemy threats... design their engines in such a way that they are obliterated when the warhead explodes and fit it with various failsafe measures so intact models will not be recoverable... and then make enormous numbers of them with the naval budget.
By having all these weapons able to hit various theatre targets across europe and near Russian naval bases across the worlds oceans and in the arctic and far east... most ABM systems in Alaska should be vulnerable to IRBM strikes from the Russian Far East and IRBMs located in the far north of Russia should make AEGIS class cruisers in the Arctic pretty vulnerable too, which leaves ICBM and SLBM warheads for targets deep inside the US... with the INF treaty and Start 3 gone Russia could ramp up its number of nukes pretty easily especially with new breeder reactors enabling the rapid production of weapons grade nuclear material... and nuclear powered cruise missiles in to the mix... the US is really biting off more than it can chew here... and it looks pretty good from here.
America is deluded. It actually believes that it "bankrupted" the USSR with the 1980s arms race. Utter delusional nonsense. The
USSR was a command economy. It did not need a budget and money to make things happen. It operated by directive. As long as there
were enough people and resources the system functioned. I hear all sorts of claims about how the USSR "blew" 30% of its GDP on the
military during the 1980s and went bankrupt. This is shyster obfuscation. Just like current nominal comparisons of Russia's military
expenditures in dollars say f*ck all about Russia's real military capacity and productivity, so the 30% figure was some baloney
estimate by a western hack. If you measured it in terms of workers numbers (the correct metric for a command economy), 30% of the
Soviet people did
NOT work on military projects. The figure was definitely less than 7%. Estimating some bogus budget that
never existed and then using it to make claims is ludicrous.
I have stated often on this board that today the USA cannot bankrupt Russia via an arms race in spite of Russia having a capitalist
economy. We live in the missile era. Missiles are the cheapest military item in terms of bang for the buck. They convert some
corvette into a destroyer in terms of real firepower. Russia does not have the rotten pork barrel culture of the US MIC where the
government buys obsolete and broken junk conventional hardware by the tens of billions of dollars. It will not respond to any
conventional arms race scheme by the USA. Instead it will use new laser and missile designs to neutralize even large numbers of
WWII type equipment. Russia has clearly demonstrated its superiority in missile technology from the strategic to the tactical end
of the spectrum. This is a cold hard fact and not hyperbole.
America and its minions did not bankrupt the USSR in terms of military spending and they will not bankrupt Russia. In fact, I see
a GDP stimulus from America's attempts to bankrupt Russia. Rational expenditures on missiles and solutions other than "let's make
50,000 tanks" will be a robust demand and source of money circulation. Not only the yanquis can gain from MIC welfare.
Home
Latest images
Register
Log in
kvs
