[Roryrules]

Think about it. It only takes about twenty minutes for an ICBM to get to North America, over the North Pole. Do you think that the 'football' can be gotten to the POTUS before then? Land based ICBMs were great when the whole system was on hair trigger, but even then there was always the question, since they can't be recalled, whether they could be launched in time. The planes used to be ready to go and were that part of the triad that could start toward their targets even if it was a false alarm. Those planes are not on hair trigger alert anymore either. Both of those legs of the triad would go down. Yes, it's possible some planes would make it up, but what would the command structure do with them once they realized what had happened?

I'm perfectly willing to admit this is a stretch, but not to dismiss it out of hand because 'it can't happen'.

Firstly, I notice that you've completely avoided answering why the Russians would press the self-destruct button. As I've pointed out, it'd be a very dramatic yet ultimately suicidal act.

Secondly, as others have already explained, you can't just push a button and fire off all the nukes. It takes time to enter in their co-ordinates, prepare the launch zone etc. That takes time and the extra activity is very visible. The idea that it's possible to completely take the US by surprise is laughable.

[dorlomin]

Secondly, as others have already explained, you can't just push a button and fire off all the nukes. It takes time to enter in their co-ordinates, prepare the launch zone etc.

What? They are in silos.

[Roryrules]

Secondly, as others have already explained, you can't just push a button and fire off all the nukes. It takes time to enter in their co-ordinates, prepare the launch zone etc.

What? They are in silos.

This is Russia we're talking about. At least half of them won't work.

And in any case, deciding to nuke the US isn't something that just gets settled in five minutes. It'd take at least a few days just to get the politicians to agree, let alone liaise with the military commanders.

[dorlomin]

This is Russia we're talking about. At least half of them won't work.

That is a different argument all together.

And in any case, deciding to nuke the US isn't something that just gets settled in five minutes.

More likely it would not happen as there is no need for it.

And neither side has ever been capable of a real complete counterforce first strike. The entire premise is deeply flawed.

This entire thread is deeply flawed. Its the stuff of Tom Clancy novels and little more.

[radon]

It takes time to enter in their co-ordinates, prepare the launch zone etc. That takes time and the extra activity is very visible.

Well.. all the extra activities after the initiation of the launch sequence happen within a minute or so:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4kkD9lKeE44
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aIDEBOTTpYk

No launch zone preparation is needed. Pre-detecting them within such a short time frame is virtually impossible. This is why it is better to hold them non-directed as they are and avoid provocations that can make them directed again at their old targets.

This is Russia we're talking about. At least half of them won't work.

Fantasizing?

[Cog]

Russia is bluffing. Call their bluff and install the defensive system.

[radon]

Russia is bluffing. Call their bluff and install the defensive system.

And install Cog on the top of the defensive system so that he could vindicate his bluff call personally. Oh no, too much for that, a few Poles would suffice.

Interesting, why the US are so keen on a stationary installation. Presumably, if sea-borne installation is possible then a land-based mobile installation should be possible too. A mobile platform would presumably be far more difficult to attack.

[Roryrules]

This entire thread is deeply flawed. Its the stuff of Tom Clancy novels and little more.

Quoted for truth.

[dorlomin]

Presumably, if sea-borne installation is possible then a land-based mobile installation should be possible too. A mobile platform would presumably be far more difficult to attack.

Again one has to wonder at the abilities of some people to think clearly. The 'seaborne' installation is an Aegis kitted cruiser. They weigh about 10 000 tonnes.

Good luck with that on the public highway.

The Russians real concern with this is the ability to see deeper into Russian airspace, to track normal aircraft and gather intellegence.

[radon]

Presumably, if sea-borne installation is possible then a land-based mobile installation should be possible too. A mobile platform would presumably be far more difficult to attack.

Again one has to wonder at the abilities of some people to think clearly. The 'seaborne' installation is an Aegis kitted cruiser. They weigh about 10 000 tonnes.

Good clarification, thanks. No reason, though, that they cannot think of developing mobile complexes, in similar way as the mobile missile complexes in Russia were developed on the basis of the underground silo-based ones.

[dissident]

Presumably, if sea-borne installation is possible then a land-based mobile installation should be possible too. A mobile platform would presumably be far more difficult to attack.

Again one has to wonder at the abilities of some people to think clearly. The 'seaborne' installation is an Aegis kitted cruiser. They weigh about 10 000 tonnes.

Good luck with that on the public highway.

What are you smoking? The BMD interceptors in their static silos will not have much use once they are nuked, before Russian ICBMs are launched. There ain't gonna be no BMD-BMD that will make them safe from short range surface to surface nuclear tipped missiles. So having the interceptors, which are not that large by the way, on mobile platforms makes plenty of sense. The weight of the ship has zero to do with the weight of the interceptors.

The Russians real concern with this is the ability to see deeper into Russian airspace, to track normal aircraft and gather intellegence.

BS. You don't use phased array radar installations for communications monitoring. The US uses satellites and spies for this. The BMD is a 100% strategic nuclear force issue. It is a brazen attempt by the Yankees to achieve their "full spectrum" dominance. They are using the Europeans as a meaty fig leaf for cover. When Russia targets the long range radar complexes and interceptor silos in Poland, Romania, Czech Republic there will be wailing and gnashing of the teeth from this cannon fodder. It will be Russia "threatening" innocent Europeans. This will give the Yankees a pretext to deploy short range nuclear missiles in those countries for "defense".

The best solution for this Yankee chantage is for Russia to stop with nuclear disarmament and start building up the numbers of ICBMs it has back to 1980s levels. This will make sure that the Yankees don't get any illusions about "full spectrum" dominance.

[Roryrules]

The best solution for this Yankee chantage is for Russia to stop with nuclear disarmament and start building up the numbers of ICBMs it has back to 1980s levels. This will make sure that the Yankees don't get any illusions about "full spectrum" dominance.

Well quite. The Cold War was so much fun last time round, why not try it again?

[evilgenius]

Think about it. It only takes about twenty minutes for an ICBM to get to North America, over the North Pole. Do you think that the 'football' can be gotten to the POTUS before then? Land based ICBMs were great when the whole system was on hair trigger, but even then there was always the question, since they can't be recalled, whether they could be launched in time. The planes used to be ready to go and were that part of the triad that could start toward their targets even if it was a false alarm. Those planes are not on hair trigger alert anymore either. Both of those legs of the triad would go down. Yes, it's possible some planes would make it up, but what would the command structure do with them once they realized what had happened?

I'm perfectly willing to admit this is a stretch, but not to dismiss it out of hand because 'it can't happen'.

Firstly, I notice that you've completely avoided answering why the Russians would press the self-destruct button. As I've pointed out, it'd be a very dramatic yet ultimately suicidal act.

Secondly, as others have already explained, you can't just push a button and fire off all the nukes. It takes time to enter in their co-ordinates, prepare the launch zone etc. That takes time and the extra activity is very visible. The idea that it's possible to completely take the US by surprise is laughable.

Ha, ha, ha.

I've already answered your first question, you've just seen fit to ignore it. Let me make my point in another way. Yamamoto knew that the Japanese would lose to the United States yet he still went along with and recommended Pearl Harbor because it was in the best interest of his country. He couldn't see any other way that they had a chance, given the way that everything was stacked up against them. Well, the situation is worse for the Russians if the US can implement a missile defense shield that works.

[dorlomin]

What are you smoking? The BMD interceptors in their static silos will not have much use once they are nuked, before Russian ICBMs are launched.

They are in the wrong position to be much use as interceptors against US bound warheads. So Russias nuking them is a moot point.

BS. You don't use phased array radar installations for communications monitoring.

No one said other wise. But monitoring the flight plaths of aircraft is intelligence gathering.

It is a brazen attempt by the Yankees to achieve their "full spectrum" dominance.

The location makes sense to intercept balistic missiles from the middle east, but not from east of the Urals. You cannot launch from that far behind on a balistic trajectory and catch up. Nor can you carry anywhere near enough fuel to be under a powered burn the whole journey. The interceptors are not threat to US bound missiles from Russia. They may be a small partial shield for Europe, but only a small part of Europe.



This will give the Yankees a pretext to deploy short range nuclear missiles in those countries for "defense".

The best solution for this Yankee chantage is for Russia to stop with nuclear disarmament and start building up the numbers of ICBMs it has back to 1980s levels. This will make sure that the Yankees don't get any illusions about "full spectrum" dominance.[/quote]

[dorlomin]

if the US can implement a missile defense shield that works.

They cant.

[radon]

The best solution for this Yankee chantage is for Russia to stop with nuclear disarmament and start building up the numbers of ICBMs it has back to 1980s levels.

Then Russia may go broke faster than the US does.

evilgenius wrote:
if the US can implement a missile defense shield that works.

They cant.

Don't say this aloud, or 6strings won't be able to sleep outside his bunker.

[dissident]

The best solution for this Yankee chantage is for Russia to stop with nuclear disarmament and start building up the numbers of ICBMs it has back to 1980s levels.

Then Russia may go broke faster than the US does.

Nonsense. Nuclear weapons are by far the cheapest. Maintaining million man armies with thousands of aircraft and tanks is a real waste of money since there will never be WWII style conventional warfare in the nuclear ICBM era.

[Roryrules]

Nonsense. Nuclear weapons are by far the cheapest. Maintaining million man armies with thousands of aircraft and tanks is a real waste of money since there will never be WWII style conventional warfare in the nuclear ICBM era.

Oh c'mon, that's rubbish and we both know it. There have been plenty of conventional wars since the introduction of ICBMs, even between the two main superpowers via proxies. There's still a very real need to maintain a capable, conventional force.

[radon]

The numbers are sobering actually. Russia maintains nuclear parity with the US at a fifth or less of the cost - nothing short of extreme efficiency. 10 bln pa is nuts for a country like Russia, doubling the current stockpile would cost 10 bln to Russia and over 50 bln to the US. Maybe making sense as a kind of tactics.

NB those who acclaim that the "value" is being transferred from "extremely efficient" developed countries to "notoriously inefficient" developing ones. One US "moocher" consumption basket could feed 5 Russian "moochers". Who is more efficient.

The numbers also make the argument about Reagan's burying the Soviet Union under the financial burden of the strategic weapons race looking very strange.

[SeaGypsy]

Like many places, Russia had been slow to exploit resources. It is rapidly becoming a real economy as pariah status from the old cold war hangover fades and contractual ability internationally becomes more solid. Putin seems to have a genius for the fundamentals, one of which is to always appear the strong man in a nation of strong men if you want to hold leadership. As I said earlier, this is a sabre rattling exercise, bit of theater. Russia is not about ready to do hari-kari; which is what a nuke exchange would amount to. A strange thing about the nuclear option for TEOTWAWKI is it's absurdity.