[Rushtalk] Thank GOD Hillary did not get Elected

Richard Whitenight rwhitenight2004 at gmail.com
Fri Nov 18 14:08:26 MST 2016


OK let's hold down the talk about St. Petersburg, Russia, because I have a
friend that lives there and I would still like to talk to him on Twitter 😂

On Fri, Nov 18, 2016 at 14:52 Carl Spitzer <cwsiv at juno.com> wrote:

> *Russia's RS-28 Sarmat Nuclear Missile Could Wipe Out an Area the Size of
> France (But Is it Overkill?)* Michael Peck
> <http://nationalinterest.org/profile/michael-peck> November 11, 2016
>
> Tweet
> <http://twitter.com/share?url=http%3A%2F%2Fnationalinterest.org%2Fblog%2Fthe-buzz%2Frussias-rs-28-sarmat-nuclear-missile-could-wipe-out-area-the-18382&text=Russia%26%23039%3Bs%20RS-28%20Sarmat%20Nuclear%20Missile%20Could%20Wipe%20Out%20an%20Area%20the%20Size%20of%20France%20%28But%20Is%20it%20Overkill%3F%29>
> Share
> <http://www.facebook.com/sharer/sharer.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fnationalinterest.org%2Fblog%2Fthe-buzz%2Frussias-rs-28-sarmat-nuclear-missile-could-wipe-out-area-the-18382>
> Share
> <https://www.linkedin.com/cws/share?url=http%3A%2F%2Fnationalinterest.org%2Fblog%2Fthe-buzz%2Frussias-rs-28-sarmat-nuclear-missile-could-wipe-out-area-the-18382> [image:
> Printer-friendly version]
> <http://nationalinterest.org/print/blog/the-buzz/russias-rs-28-sarmat-nuclear-missile-could-wipe-out-area-the-18382>
> “If you go on with this nuclear arms race, all you are going to do is make
> the rubble bounce,” warned Winston Churchill
> <https://www.nationalchurchillmuseum.org/winston-churchill-and-the-cold-war.html>.
> That was in 1952, just two years after America tested the first hydrogen
> bomb, and five years before the United States deployed the first ICBM.
>
> So what would Churchill make of America’s and Russia’s plans to build new
> missiles? Probably have a snifter of brandy and mutter about how silly the
> whole thing is.
>
> Russia is deploying its new RS-28 Sarmat ICBM, a hundred-ton,
> twelve-warhead behemoth which makes America’s thirty-nine-ton Minuteman
> ICBM look like a rocket-propelled toothpick.
>
> Meanwhile, the United States is also joining the new missile race with its Ground-Based
> Strategic Deterrent
> <http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/archive/2016/august/Pages/AirForceKicksOffProgramtoReplaceMinutemanIIIMissiles.aspx>
> (GBSD), a replacement for its fifty-year-old force of Minuteman ICBMs.
> Estimated to cost at least $85 billion, the Pentagon says GBSD is needed
> because the U.S. land-based ICBM infrastructure dates back to the
> mid-1960s, while even the current Minuteman III missile was first deployed
> in 1970.
>
> This is great news for defense contractors, east and west. But what do
> America and Russia—and their respective citizens—really get out of this
> spending spree?
>
> Russian media boasts
> <https://sputniknews.com/russia/201605081039258053-russia-ballistic-missile-sarmat>
> that the Sarmat is more accurate than its predecessors, and is “capable of
> wiping out parts of the Earth the size of Texas or France.”
>
> Yet since American missiles are equally capable of wiping out parts of the
> Earth the size of Moscow or St. Petersburg, what advantage does Russia
> gain? If the goal is to deter an American attack, the old ICBMs will work
> as well as the new ones.
>
> And if the goal is to develop a first-strike capability to destroy
> American missiles before they can be launched? Even if you choose to cast
> Putin as some kind of Cold War villain who rubs his hands in maniacal glee
> as he contemplates launching a surprise attack on the unsuspecting
> *amerikantsy*, he would have to be certain of destroying enough of
> America’s 450 Minuteman ICBMs in their hardened silos—not to mention
> nuclear submarines and bombers—that no counterstrike could be launched. Can
> you imagine Putin or any Russian leader taking a chance that his nation
> won’t be reduced to the level of Mad Max or the medieval Duchy of Muscovy?
>
> Interestingly, Russian media reports that “Sarmat warheads will have an
> array of advanced antimissile countermeasures meant to penetrate the US ABM
> [antiballistic missile] shield.” Which suggests that the new missile may be
> aimed at penetrating American missile defenses, or at least signaling that
> Moscow has the capability to do so. But the fact is that the U.S. Ballistic
> Missile Defense System is only designed to stop a limited ICBM barrage from
> small nations like North Korea and Iran, not an all-out Russian strike.
> Ironically, Moscow has more faith in U.S. missile defense than the Government
> Accountability Office
> <http://spacenews.com/gao-missile-defense-agency-is-using-high-risk-approach-for-additional-interceptors/>
> and other critics, who point to numerous flaws that quite possibly will
> render the system ineffective.
>
> It is equally hard to see how GBSD will enhance American security. The Air
> Force says
> <http://www.af.mil/News/ArticleDisplay/tabid/223/Article/881075/af-releases-new-icbm-solicitation.aspx>
> the Minuteman III force is becoming too vulnerable to attack. But if Russia
> were to contemplate launching a nuclear strike upon the United States, it
> seems unlikely that the age of U.S. ICBMs would make a difference. As for a
> rogue state like North Korea, they will launch a missile at the United
> States for their own reasons, and not because it will be a Minuteman or a
> GBSD that will turn the Hermit Kingdom into radioactive slag.
>
> What does make more sense is the obsolescence issue for missiles that date
> back to the Nixon and Brezhnev era. The Sarmat is supposed to replace
> Russia’s aging 1970s RS-36M2 missiles. Think it’s hard to get parts for a
> fifty-year-old car or refrigerator, or MS-DOS software to play on your
> Windows 10 computer? The U.S. ICBM force was built with a lot of custom
> parts that aren’t built anymore. Notoriously, a special wrench was needed
> to install nuclear warheads on America’s 450 Minuteman III missiles: there
> was only one tool kit that had the wrench, which had to be FedExed from
> base to base.
>
> So, perhaps it was inevitable that new missiles would be needed once the
> old ones became unreliable or too expensive to maintain. Nonetheless, there
> are promising technologies other than big, silo-based ICBMs, such as hypersonic
> weapons
> <http://www.defenseone.com/technology/2016/04/problem-pentagon-hypersonic-missile/127493/>.
> Meanwhile, China is buffing its conventional military capabilities in the
> Pacific. Russia is waging a hybrid mixture of conventional and
> unconventional warfare, and American troops on the ground still face IEDs
> and insurgents.
>
>
>
> --
> ----CWSIV----
>
>  ,= ,-_-. =.
> ((_/)o o(\_))
>  `-'(. .)`-'
>      \_/
>
> America works when American citizens work.
> Freedom and open source the GNU paradigm.
>
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> *1 Simple Trick Removes Eye Bags in 90 Seconds*
> Daily Tiply
> <http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3132/582f69b299a4768a37aa1st04vuc>
> http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3132/582f69b299a4768a37aa1st04vuc
> [image: SponsoredBy Content.Ad]
> _______________________________________________
> Rushtalk mailing list
> Rushtalk at csdco.com
> http://kalos.csdco.com/mailman/listinfo/rushtalk
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://kalos.csdco.com/pipermail/rushtalk/attachments/20161118/6c949612/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: print_icon.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 328 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://kalos.csdco.com/pipermail/rushtalk/attachments/20161118/6c949612/attachment.gif 


More information about the Rushtalk mailing list