TU-160 Blackjacks - Chavez offer base for Russian bombers

[geetrue]

Russia has made it well known that they are not interested in a missile defense shield in Europe even if suppose to just be against the Iranian threat of a missle attack.

Hence the threat to base long range bombers in Cuba or Venezuela for trading purposes. More like chinese checkers than chess, uh?

The Russians never stop thinking about their next move ... I wouldn't be surprised if they have a strike first plan with the thought the good ole USA would give up rather than fight on.

I wonder what the war colleges do all day with all of their time to think?

Speaking of war colleges the only one I know is the one in Newport, Rhode Island.

Does anyone know the others?

[Max2147]

Originally Posted by geetrue

The Russians never stop thinking about their next move ... I wouldn't be surprised if they have a strike first plan with the thought the good ole USA would give up rather than fight on.

And you think we don't have a first strike plan on Russia? I'm sure we've both had plans to wipe each other out with a sneak attack since the early 50's, if not sooner. Plan R anybody?

I'm sure every major country has a basic plan on how to attack any other major country.

Here's our old plan to invade Canada: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...122901412.html

[NeonSamurai]

I'm sure they got an updated invade Canada plan too.

[Tchocky]

Plan R anybody?

[Raptor1]

Well, as long as we got enough mineshafts...

Anyway, I doubt that even if they base Tupolevs there it'll change the strategic situation much, put MRBMs there and it's probably a slightly different story

It's a shame whatever real alliance Russia can come up with won't have nearly as catchy a name as 'Warsaw Pact'

[XabbaRus]

I'm not entirely sure and I need to get sources but I have heard that Soviet defese doctrine was that a nuclear war was winnable.

This I think is what made them dangerous is that they would be less afraid to launch the nukes as many are mobile and potentially survivable thus after the US had launched her nukes at the Russian missile fields they would have little left in reserve after a Soviet first strike against ICBMs...

The theory being the Soviets would have enough left to go after the cities which the US wouldn't want as they couldn't retaliate and thus would sue for peace.

This is of course back before the US had precision strike missiles etc...

[Max2147]

Originally Posted by XabbaRus

I'm not entirely sure and I need to get sources but I have heard that Soviet defese doctrine was that a nuclear war was winnable.

This I think is what made them dangerous is that they would be less afraid to launch the nukes as many are mobile and potentially survivable thus after the US had launched her nukes at the Russian missile fields they would have little left in reserve after a Soviet first strike against ICBMs...

The theory being the Soviets would have enough left to go after the cities which the US wouldn't want as they couldn't retaliate and thus would sue for peace.

This is of course back before the US had precision strike missiles etc...

The Soviets had a clear conventional advantage in Europe during the Cold War, so if a hypothetical WW3 broke out, they would almost certainly have wanted to stay away from nuclear weapons as long as possible. The Soviets also had a no first use policy for nuclear weapons, although I'm sure they could have broken that policy if they had to.

Then there's the issue of escalation. Once war broke out, I think each side would have been cautious about increasing the level of nuclear weapon use. In other words, a few tactical nukes on the battlefield wouldn't have lead straight to an Armageddon nuclear exchange. There was also the possibility of a regional nuclear war, where the Soviets nuked our allies and we nuked theirs, but we specifically avoided nuking each other. It was (and still is) a huge topic of debate whether that escalation could have been stopped. From what I know, American wargames showed that the escalation would have proceeded slowly but inexorably. In other words, Armageddon was the inevitable endpoint, but it might have taken a while to get there.