SpyLOG
24/4/2014 18:44
RIA Novosti

Defense

Russia Warns of Nuclear Response to US Global Strike Program

17:15 11/12/2013
Tags: nuclear weapons, Yars, high-precision hypersonic weapon systems, global strike program, Dmitry Rogozin, Russia

 

MOSCOW, December 11 (RIA Novosti) – A senior government minister warned Wednesday that Russia could retaliate with a nuclear strike if a new US military strategy threatened its security.

Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin said that Russia was “preparing a response” to plans by the United States to develop a new fast-strike weapons platform capable of hitting high-priority targets around the globe.

He told the State Duma that the development of a global strike program was “the most important new strategy being developed by the United States today.”

“They may experiment with conventional weapons on strategic delivery platforms, but they must bear in mind, that if we are attacked, in certain circumstances we will of course respond with nuclear weapons,” Rogozin said.

He stressed that Russia cannot ignore the development of high-precision hypersonic weapon systems. Rogozin’s comment came a day after President Putin announced that 40 new Yars (SS-29) Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles (ICBMs) would be added to Russia’s nuclear arsenal in 2014.

The US administration under President George W. Bush considered the idea of a global strike capability, but abandoned the project over fears that launching an ICBM with a conventional warhead might accidentally trigger a nuclear war.

 

  • Add to blog
  • Send to friend
  • Share

Add to blog

You may place this material on your blog by copying the link.

Publication code:

Preview:

RIA NovostiWarheadRussia Warns of Nuclear Response to US Global Strike Program

17:15 11/12/2013 A senior government minister warned Wednesday that Russia could retaliate with a nuclear strike if a new US military strategy threatened its security.>>

Send by e-mail

All fields are required!



Leave a comment
  • antfreRussia warns
    17:33, 11/12/2013
    C'mon man, you sound so old fashion. Everybody know that Russia cannot make war this days. The soldiers would throw away their weapons and go home, remember? just like 1917, but for different purposes.
    • sohelsaheen@antfre...Putin's key!
      21:18, 12/12/2013
      Dude...russia does not need the soldiers. Mr. Putin has the key and can go alone. Donot be silly!
      Reply | Comments: 1Expand branch
    • LocoIvanHere we go again.
      00:24, 12/12/2013
      The anxious twaddle/pectoral pounding of a ‘puffy chest’ Russian Deputy Prime Minister clucking like a barnyard hen about to be pursued by the c*ck of the walk.

      What happened to your confidence DPM Rogozin?

      Your assertion on 30Sep13 that Russia is ‘…neck and neck with the Americans as far as these (hypersonic) technologies are concerned’ is now reinforced with a warning ‘…that Russia could retaliate with a nuclear strike if a new US military strategy threatened its security’?

      So why the machismo posturing if you are at par? Hmmm.

      http://en.ria.ru/military_news/20130930/183845015/Russia-US-Neck-and-Neck-in-Hypersonic-Research--Rogozin.html

      Perhaps your parapraxis generated showmanship speaks to a far more serious set-back and Russia IS NOT as ‘neck and neck’ as you were LED to believe?

      Just reference the success rate of the RSM-56 and the proclamation that it can deliver ‘…six to ten independently targeted HYPERSONIC MANEUVERING nuclear warheads, which CAN CHANGE their FLIGHT TRAJECTORY’S (sic) ALTITUDES AND DIRECTION’.

      Astonishingly impressive, if true.

      Hypersonic control/operations can be a tricky little devil to tame, no?

      Besides, as an operationally deployed system, the Americans are not going to launch an ICBM just to facilitate a hypersonic vehicle strike for the very reason that your inherent Russian paranoia suggests ‘…over fears that launching an ICBM with a conventional warhead might accidentally trigger a nuclear war.’

      They are certainly more ‘forward thinking’ then you give them credit for, just wait and see.;)

      Moreover, any rapid reusable hypersonic cruise vehicle they develop will launch from a runway and ideally stay within Earth’s atmosphere only to end with a warranted gift for end-user 60-120 minutes later, LOL.
    • GarryBIt seems the readers don't get it
      03:09, 12/12/2013
      It seems some people don't get it.

      Just like US plans for mini bunker busting nukes would lower the threshold of using nukes against an enemy and therefore make the use of nuclear weapons not only more possible but actually likely, the US now wants to put conventional weapons on ICBMs so that instead of using a sub launched cruise missile to destroy a baby milk factory in Yemen they will use ICBMs... making the use of ICBMs more likely than ever before.

      The problem with this use is... how does the other side know it is not a preemptive strike with an EMP bomb to start a nuclear war or is a a bunker buster nuke to hit a critical target rapidly in Iran... the Russians are just saying that if the missile goes anywhere near Russia they will not wait to see if it goes past and hits somewhere else and they certainly wont be waiting to see if it is conventionally armed or not... they will treat it like a nuke and respond accordingly... which is likely how Israel would react to a similar Iranian capability.
      • jg(no title)
        22:45, 12/12/2013
        Exactly. A similar problem developed during the Cold War: NATO could not match the numbers of Warsaw Pact tanks and other armoured vehicles, so a strategy developed in which NATO would respond with small battlefield nuclear weapons only two days into any incursion by Warsaw pact armour. The snag with this idea was that, as the Warsaw Pact did not posses much in the way of small scale battlefield nuclear weapons, they would have responded with rather larger nuclear weapons and the whole thing would have escalated from their. NATO came to understand that, if the Warsaw Pact rolled into West Germany, we would be in a full scale nuclear war within a week. (NATO went on to develop numerous anti-tank weapon systems, so as to avoid such an outcome).

        It seems that people don't always think through the bigger implications of deploying new weapon systems and the possibility of unintended consequences.
      • georges70@verizon.netRussia Warns of Nuclear Retaliation to US Global
        01:48, 13/12/2013
        The US has no justification whatsoever for global strike programs. This is nothing more than aggression, the #1 war crime, according to International and US Law. And, remember, Russia's military forces have improved dramatically under President Vladimir Putin. This is no longer Boris Yeltsin's Russia.
        • mishkaThe virus is already inside.
          03:20, 13/12/2013
          Dear my friend I certainly agree with you about US global strike program is a war crime. But about Putin's Russia I would like to say dont be sure so much it is different from Yeltsin's Russia. I appraciate president Putin. The country has had progress dramatically under his administration. He is correct and right at almost everything in his decisions. But anybody does not have so much to do by social corruption I have been almost like a Russian since 2008 and I have experience and observations enough to talk about it.

          Look at Ukraine. The same game was tried also in Russia last year.

          Dont expect those heroes defended Stalingrad, Leningrad once upon times. Many people in Russia see a possible war with the west as an opportunity for a power trasnformation i Russia to a pro western administration or to acquire nationality to a western country. Believe me there too much people in Russia dream of a remote controlled western puppet administration like Shaakashvili or Tymoshenko. Millions f Russian ladies try to find a foreign husband to leave Russia.

          It might be useful to read a post that http://www.foreignermishka.blogspot.com/2012/07/self-threat-for-future.html

          Dont forget please it happened in Iraq, many of Saddam's soldiers surrendered to Americans even without firing a bullet.

          Evil decive you by smiling. Everything devilish is easy and seductive. Now I understand very well why Soviet Union kept the western culture out for decades.

          And Russia has also technical challenges. Even now Bulava missle test mostly unsuccesful. Russian MArs probe could not leave even earth's orbit. Israeli air force had an air raid to a Syrian military facility and could destroy most advanced Russian Mosqit anti ship missiles. Why Russian made air defence systems could not stop them and hit the aggrassive war planes?

          Russia has had a brain drain to the west. Great and magnificent Russian scientists work in the west. It may be also a role of foreign possible sabotage to improvement and R&D processes of key Russian defence projects in their delays.

          The west has already conquered Russia internally.
        • LocoIvanOh dear, GarryB, you…
          03:20, 13/12/2013
          certainly can talk a lot of manure.

          Just like US plans for mini bunker busting nukes would lower the threshold of using nukes against an enemy and therefore make the use of nuclear weapons not only more possible but actually likely,’

          WRONG.

          Welcome to Oct 2005. That plan was cancelled:

          ‘House and Senate conferees working to resolve differences in the FY 2006 appropriations bill have eliminated research funding for the Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator external link (RNEP) weapon during the reconciliation process. In April 2005, a National Research Council report external link concluded that there are many hardened targets beyond the reach of current conventional weapons in the U.S. stockpile. It also stated that calculations demonstrated it would be impossible to contain all of the radiation underground from the use of an RNEP, but did note that the number of civilian causalities from the use of an RNEP would be considerably fewer than the use of a surface burst nuclear weapon.’(DefenseIndustryDaily;Oct2005)

          the US now wants to put conventional weapons on ICBMs so that instead of using a sub launched cruise missile to destroy…they will use ICBMs... making the use of ICBMs more likely than ever before.’

          WRONG.

          The…USAF…wants to ditch the ballistic missile aspect of Prompt Global Strike and replace it with a hypersonic glider air-launched from a heavy bomber, like any of the Air Force’s current non-nuclear cruise missiles. That way nobody can mistake the weapon for a nuke.

          Our focus is on boost-glide capabilities, including the Hypersonic Technology Vehicle concept,” Maj. Gen. David Scott said this week. “We have no plans for conventionally armed sea-based missiles such as a [Navy] Conventional Trident modification or conventionally-armed ICBMs.”’ (Wired;03Feb2011)


          Next time, stay on subject and attempt a little research before manufacturing your alternate state of reality, it does wonders for credibility.

          Kthxby
          • GarryBhahahaha
            13:43, 13/12/2013
            You are funny.

            The US military and government planned to lower the threshold for using nuclear weapons... FACT.

            Just because it would not have been effective doesn't mean that is not something they were trying to do.

            And whether it comes from an ICBM or hypersonic glider the Russians wont know if it is nuclear armed or not till far too late so they wont be able to waste time waiting to see. They have to react quickly and in their own best interests... I believe in the west that is called Russian Roulette. (which was actually a western invention as the primary revolver used by Russian forces... the Nagant revolver doesn't have a cylinder that spins freely to allow the game to be played).
            Reply | Comments: 1Expand branch

          Рейтинг@Mail.ru  Rambler's Top100
          © 2014  RIA Novosti
          Some material may be inappropriate for those under 18