Russia tests secret missile after Nato shield launched

kraznyi_oktjabr · 05-23-12, 02:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Raptor1

It can penetrate Nato's European missile defence shield shield? That's...interesting... -snip-

It would be really interesting to see the result if Russian agreed to test fire those (preferably dummy warheads) against NATO defences to see what the results are. Agreed upon with no fixed launch time to make it more realistic.

Bilge_Rat · 05-23-12, 03:01 PM

The Bulava is also designed to avoid NATO's missile defence shield.

This fits in to the Cold War MAD concept. As long as both sides are assured of mutual destruction, each side is supposedly safer.

The missile shield upsets that equation since, in theory, NATO could launch a nuclear first strike against Russia while being protected from retaliation. Bulava/Yars restores the MAD equilibrium.

In theory, NATO should have no issue with this since the missile shield is only supposed to protect against Iranian/NK missiles.

Kazuaki Shimazaki II · 05-23-12, 08:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bilge_Rat

In theory, NATO should have no issue with this since the missile shield is only supposed to protect against Iranian/NK missiles.

indeed. Does anyone really believe NATO's propaganda on this subject, that this is not a anti-Russian measure as well (or perhaps the real primary target)?

Catfish · 05-24-12, 02:09 AM

If you follow the "news" of the last years, the "defence shield" was primarily intended to protect Israel and the US, against iranian long range missiles - some people here have a short period of remembering.
So when you look at any map, if this shield was initially planned to protect Israel and the USA (one cannot say this often enough), the location as we see it now makes perfect sense, doesn't it ?

Ah, yes, to protect Europe. Good they got this idea at last, otherwise it would not make NO SENSE at all.
This positioning indeed undermines the "equilibrium of terror", so the russian response is only logical.
It also seems the Russians are not quite as brainwashed as us. I do not know whether i should like that or not, though.

And, b.t.w.: http://www.oneangryman.com/ken/2012/...r-with-the-us/

HunterICX · 05-24-12, 03:46 AM

Keeping the threat alive while there is none.

HunterICX

Catfish · 05-24-12, 05:03 AM

^ you know we urgently NEED a new threat to have a reason to fund all those non-existing agencies, and have a reason for wars of aggression which then can be fought in the name (sic) of world freedom

HunterICX · 05-24-12, 05:09 AM

^
No those are for show that we they're ''doing something'' about the threat but it's the fear the governement likes to abuse to keep control over the masses and have things shuffed down our throats in name of national security.

HunterICX

Jimbuna · 05-23-12, 05:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kraznyi_oktjabr

It would be really interesting to see the result if Russian agreed to test fire those (preferably dummy warheads) against NATO defences to see what the results are. Agreed upon with no fixed launch time to make it more realistic.

Indeed

05-23-12, 03:01 PM	#2
Bilge_Rat Silent Hunter Join Date: Apr 2002 Location: standing watch... Posts: 3,856 Downloads: 344 Uploads: 0	The Bulava is also designed to avoid NATO's missile defence shield. This fits in to the Cold War MAD concept. As long as both sides are assured of mutual destruction, each side is supposedly safer. The missile shield upsets that equation since, in theory, NATO could launch a nuclear first strike against Russia while being protected from retaliation. Bulava/Yars restores the MAD equilibrium. In theory, NATO should have no issue with this since the missile shield is only supposed to protect against Iranian/NK missiles. __________________

05-24-12, 03:46 AM	#5
HunterICX Rear Admiral Join Date: May 2006 Location: Malaga, España Posts: 10,750 Downloads: 8 Uploads: 0	Keeping the threat alive while there is none. HunterICX __________________

05-24-12, 05:09 AM	#7
HunterICX Rear Admiral Join Date: May 2006 Location: Malaga, España Posts: 10,750 Downloads: 8 Uploads: 0	^ No those are for show that we they're ''doing something'' about the threat but it's the fear the governement likes to abuse to keep control over the masses and have things shuffed down our throats in name of national security. HunterICX __________________

05-24-12, 02:09 AM	#4
Catfish Dipped Squirrel Operative Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: ..where the ocean meets the sky Posts: 17,767 Downloads: 38 Uploads: 0	If you follow the "news" of the last years, the "defence shield" was primarily intended to protect Israel and the US, against iranian long range missiles - some people here have a short period of remembering. So when you look at any map, if this shield was initially planned to protect Israel and the USA (one cannot say this often enough), the location as we see it now makes perfect sense, doesn't it ? Ah, yes, to protect Europe. Good they got this idea at last, otherwise it would not make NO SENSE at all. This positioning indeed undermines the "equilibrium of terror", so the russian response is only logical. It also seems the Russians are not quite as brainwashed as us. I do not know whether i should like that or not, though. And, b.t.w.: http://www.oneangryman.com/ken/2012/...r-with-the-us/

05-24-12, 05:03 AM	#6
Catfish Dipped Squirrel Operative Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: ..where the ocean meets the sky Posts: 17,767 Downloads: 38 Uploads: 0	^ you know we urgently NEED a new threat to have a reason to fund all those non-existing agencies, and have a reason for wars of aggression which then can be fought in the name (sic) of world freedom