Comments on: Russia’s New BMD-Beater

By: K.A.Sharma

K.A.Sharma — Fri, 17 Aug 2007 07:14:19 +0000

I do not agree that Russia has used photoshop to project the MIRVed missile RS-24. Americans are fed on so much propaganda by their news media and administration that they just can’t imagine someone else can have capabilities matching theirs. After all one must remember Russia sent a man to space before the U.S. did. Perhaps Russia is the only other nation in the world that has some of the comparable technology to U.S. It’s no credit to U.S. that Russian Scientists are working in U.S.Universities while their own are busy creating conditions for an Arms race.

By: bobbymike34

bobbymike34 — Mon, 11 Jun 2007 19:18:27 +0000

Strategic weapon activity in Russia and China should continue to press upon the US the need for modernized strategic forces of its own. Instead we have articles about Trident replacemnt in 2029 and Minuteman III to 2040.
The US needs new systems with the most modern technology available.

By: lucabrazi

lucabrazi — Fri, 08 Jun 2007 17:37:38 +0000

The numbers I cited from the Swedish study should’ve read 7,000 to 2,000. Personally, I’d guess the actual total is probably lower than the floor they cited.

By: lucabrazi

lucabrazi — Fri, 08 Jun 2007 07:15:17 +0000

They tested two systems. One was the ICBM, the other was a hybrid of some sort– a cruise missile launched using the launcher and support equipment of an Iskander ballistic missile.
Granted they aren’t the Soviets but they are: designing, testing and deploying stuff at a steady clip; increasing their investment in defense by double digits; selling lots of miltech to the PRC; and they still have a nuke complex sized to service a Cold War era force (according to one 2005 Swedish Defence Research Agency report they remain capable of producing 10,000 to 2,000 warheads per year). Just because the glass is half empty by Soviet-era standards, doesn’t mean things won’t get messy if it gets tipped over. None of this is cause for hysteria, but it also isn’t an excuse to exercise our anti-BMD reflexes either.

By: Grandjester

Grandjester — Thu, 07 Jun 2007 17:57:23 +0000

Byron,
Wouldn’t VLADGRAD be more apropo?

By: Byron Skinner

Byron Skinner — Thu, 07 Jun 2007 17:45:18 +0000

Good Morning Folks,
This story is getting funnier by the day. Over on another sie I saw that the Russians are saying oops, last week test was NOT an RS-25 ICBM but an Iskander-M (SS-26 Stone) or an R-500 the Russians were not real clear, both short range missiles, but they did say that the test showed a one meter accuracy for what ever was tested and offered photo evidence, sure like no one has heard of “Photoshop”.
To Mr. Putin, you are not “Peter the Great” and when you die they won’t name/rename a city St. Putinburg.
ALLONS,
Byron Skinner

By: John

John — Thu, 07 Jun 2007 17:12:49 +0000

Skyler is dead on. To suggest that this is a “response” to the BMD is pure propaganda by the anti-BMD crowd. This missile has been in development for many, many years.
If we didn’t have a BMD program and the Russians rolled this missile out, the Bush-haters would be shrieking that he’s leaving us dangerously unprotected blah blah blah.

By: Skyler

Skyler — Wed, 06 Jun 2007 23:21:43 +0000

Designing a new ICBM is not an overnight ordeal… especially for Russia, who has barely any money to do so in the first place. To say that this is in “response” to the BMD program is pure opportunistic politics and propaganda.

By: Byron Skinner

Byron Skinner — Wed, 06 Jun 2007 17:52:04 +0000

Good Morning Folks,
In response to lucabrazi’s coments, the photo shown in this post of a YEL with the canister is an old one and was discredited by western intell., long ago, clue look at the tires.
AS for the Russian nuclear infrastructure, if youwant to find old line Soviet era scientists go to the Physics or Math Dept’s. of most nmajor U.S. Universities. When the Soviet Union went down so did it’s nuclear weapons program. For want of employment all the 30–40 year old mid career Scientists left the country and the best were scooped up by the U.K. and the United States.
AS to Russia’s abilitry to restart a weapons program, even with $60–70 per barell oil the Russian economy is still one click below Mexico. For Putint to become a player again with the big guy(s) he would have to invest over 20% of the Russian GDP into weapons development, unlikely. The old Soviet Union is dead.
C’s comments were pretty much on the money, buy stock in Boeing. Putin’s macherations are nothing more then an effort to make the Russsians feel that they are players once again on the world stage.
For Bush the timing couldn’t be better since he has become a salesman for Boeing Co. and pushing for a missile defense program for Europe, again protection form who?
North Korea firing a nuclear armed missile (if they had such a thing) over the lenght of Russia to hit Europe, I don’t think so. Iran’s missile program is not quite where Saddams was. They are still buying North Korean Scuds at least Saddam could make a two stage version that could and did hit Israel. Iran is not yet to this level.
Old myths die hard.
ALLONS,
Byron Skinner

By: Bill

Bill — Tue, 05 Jun 2007 19:39:07 +0000

Byron,
That is, in fact, not a shipping container but a launch canister that is part of the TEL for the road-mobile version of the ICBM.