[Rushtalk] Thank GOD Hillary did not get Elected
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
> <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]
> “If you go on with this nuclear arms race, all you are going to do is make
> the rubble bounce,” warned Winston Churchill
> 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
> (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
> 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
> 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
> 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
> 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.
> ,= ,-_-. =.
> ((_/)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
> [image: SponsoredBy Content.Ad]
> Rushtalk mailing list
> Rushtalk at csdco.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 328 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://kalos.csdco.com/pipermail/rushtalk/attachments/20161118/6c949612/attachment.gif
More information about the Rushtalk