PDA

View Full Version : russians build new nukes, possibly the shield-avoiding kind




zimv20
Nov 17, 2004, 05:15 PM
link (http://nytimes.com/2004/11/17/international/europe/17cnd-russ.html?hp&ex=1100754000&en=43ec5b71b4899370&ei=5094&partner=homepage)


New Nuclear Weapon to Surpass Others, Putin Says

MOSCOW, Nov. 17 - President Vladimir V. Putin, meeting with Russia's defense officials and military commanders here, said today that the country would soon deploy new nuclear missile systems that would surpass those of any other nuclear power.

Reiterating previous statements, though providing no new details, Mr. Putin said Russia would continue to emphasize its nuclear deterrent, despite a new focus on new threats like terrorism, which has roiled the country in recent months with deadly result.

"We are not only conducting research and successful testing of the newest nuclear missile systems," he said in concluding remarks to a regular gathering of commanders at the Ministry of Defense, which were reported by news agencies and broadcast on NTV. "I am certain that in the immediate years to come we will be armed with them. These are such developments and such systems that other nuclear states do not have and will not have in the immediate years to come.''In his remarks, which amounted to a broad overview of military strategy and budgets but with a dash of boosterism, Mr. Putin did not elaborate on the new systems he meant. The Russian military, however, is widely reported to have been trying to perfect land- and sea-based ballistic missiles with warheads that could elude a missile-defense system like the one being constructed by the Bush administration.

Mr. Putin announced in February that Russia had successfully tested a new nuclear-tipped missile during an exercise that also included two embarrassing missile misfires. At the time, he said the system would allow "deep maneuvering," a statement arms experts in Russia and abroad took to mean a warhead that could alter its course as it homed in on a target.

A day after that test, Col. Gen. Yuri N. Baluyevsky, who this summer was promoted to the chief of the general staff, said the missile was a "hypersonic flying vehicle," though neither he nor any other officials have provided further details about the weapon or, more importantly, its viability.

The missile is reportedly a variant of the Topol, a ground-based intercontinental ballistic missile that is already in Russia's arsenal, but Russia's efforts are shrouded in secrecy. Although the purpose of maneuverability would be to evade a missile-defense system, Russia already has more than enough missiles to overwhelm the limited system the United States is constructing.

In Washington, White House reaction to Mr. Putin's remarks was measured, with Scott McClellan, the presidential press secretary, telling reporters today that "this is not something that we look at as new.''

He said that President Bush and Mr. Putin, whom he characterized as "allies now in the global war on terrorism,'' had discussed the issue of modernization of Russia's military and that the nuclear element of the modernization was "something that we are well aware of.''

Pressed on whether Mr. Bush would be comfortable with changes that enabled the Russians to get around American missile defense systems, Mr. McClellan responded:

"We have a very different relationship than we did during the Cold War, and we are working together to significantly reduce our nuclear arsenals.''

(more)

i remember the 70s and 80s, when all of north america being nuked was a very real threat. are we going back to that?



skunk
Nov 17, 2004, 05:24 PM
i remember the 70s and 80s, when all of north america being nuked was a very real threat. are we going back to that?
Or, to look at it another way: why should the US have all the fun?

blackfox
Nov 17, 2004, 08:06 PM
well, that puts the last nail in the coffin of any meaningful non-proliferation treaty...

Pathetic. Both countries at least vocally acknowledge the new threats faced in the 21st Century (terrorism, urban warfare etc) and that a new paradigm is needed to effectively deal with them. That said, they promptly continue with the old one.

The only plausible (or not overwhelmingly frightening) explanation for this, is that it is geared towards China.

Mr. Anderson
Nov 17, 2004, 08:48 PM
I think the best course of action for the Russians is to make sure that anything they develop at this point is secure - I just hope the tech doesn't get out of the country.....

bleh

D

miloblithe
Nov 17, 2004, 09:57 PM
Just what the world needed. A new arms race between the US and Russia.

This is such a clear example of misplaced priorities--and entirely the fault of the Bush administration's short-sighted decision to scrap the ABM treaty to funnel new funds to their backers. Our military is ill equipt for the job it
_does_ (peacekeeping/nationbuilding), and overly equipt for a job it doesn't do (fight other armies). Maybe that's why we haven't won a war (the whole war) in 60 years.

pseudobrit
Nov 18, 2004, 08:10 AM
build a better mousetrap...

Dont Hurt Me
Nov 18, 2004, 02:45 PM
Bush has ignited a new arms race with all his stupid policies, way to go george just what the world and the U.S doesnt need.
I would guess that this new russian missile will be some type of low flying scramjet type of thing like a superfast cruise missile that there is no defense for. Missile defense is stupid for the most part because you can spend billions like we have and its still easily defeated. Diplomacy is much cheaper and works just as well or better. So hear we go again, George did not learn the lesson of vietnam , you know the war he and cheney dodged and he didnt learn the lessons from the cold war. Oh how the pentagon will be so happy to find new ways to squander our tax dollars on new military toys. :mad:

takao
Nov 18, 2004, 04:52 PM
why exactly is the US developing a missile shield (with rather small chances of hitting an incoming icbm anyways) ?

it's a lot cheaper to develop a better missile than to develop a better missile defense system....

mactastic
Nov 18, 2004, 04:55 PM
why exactly is the US developing a missile shield (with rather small chances of hitting an incoming icbm anyways) ?

it's a lot cheaper to develop a better missile than to develop a better missile defense system....

Campaign contributors in the defense industry.