Paradigm shift in the Russian Armed forces – military analysts are stunned while Western media kee

With in the last few months, other then the well known issue of ABM mess in Poland and Czechoslovakia, unprecedented event have been taking place in Russian military, all with out even a mention in the Western media.

Since I can read Russian, once in a while I check out mainstream Russian news sources to get the feel for the current events on their side, and lately I’ve noticed a very concerning chain of events, which are repeatedly ignored by the Western media.

Here’s my simple assessment.

Most importantly, the entire Russian Navy headquarters is being relocated from Moscow to St. Petersburg.

In spite of controversy with in the Russian Navy the move will go ahead as planned starting from April 2008 and is to be completed in 2009.

As much as $1.2 billion of US dollars is budgeted for relocation alone, not including infrastructure, cnc, comms, security, etc.

Opponents of the relocation reason that the funds would be better spent on as many as 6 of the newest nuclear type submarines (type 955), 15 to 20 type 677 diesel subs, or a few dozen of modernized Ту-22М3 strategic bombers.

Other major issue is the inevitable loss of staff which will chose to simply retire rather then relocate to a different city, and many are speculating that this is exactly what proponents of the relocation want in order to revitalize Russian Navy from ground up.

Such a drastic move by Russian Navy has puzzled military analysts around the world, because it would be the same as USN entirely relocating from Pentagon back to Norfolk, thus going against the very concept of centralized Pentagon concept.

All branches of Russian armed forces have been going through dramatic changes and massive exercises;

The recent Russian Armed Forces exercises, code-named "Security-2004," were advertised as the biggest for over 20 years. They lasted about a month - from late January to February 17 with some elements continuing beyond that point - and involved all branches of the armed forces as well as all six military districts.

cns.miis.edu...

After SS-N-23 missile launch failures fleet admiral Vladimir Kuroyedov was dismissed.

Could the move to St. Petersburg be related to the assessment of the Russian Navy after those failures?

Immediately following the first failure, a flurry of reports made contradictory claims: there was an explosion, the missile fell into the water, the launch was blocked by a satellite, etc. The Chief of the Navy Adm. Vladimir Kuroedov quickly declared that no "physical" launch should have taken place at all: the launch was supposed to be a simulation.

Other then the well known plans of the new Russian navy for their own fleet of nuclear super carriers another key element is being entirely overlooked.

As reported on 31.10.2007, Russian Navy in cooperation with FSB requested concept and design development for two militarized icebreakers capable of operating in ice as thick as 5 feet. The main difference between the two models will be in displacement and operating range.

The task of conceptualizing and design is supposed to be completed with in a “few months”, after which FSB will officially announce tender for a contract.

In another unprecedented move, Russian constitutional court which is located in Moscow is also being relocated to St. Petersburg in spite protests of its members!

While the move was proposed back in 2006, only recently it gained enough publicity to raise questions about the reasons for relocation.

Another article quietly mentions that system wide implementation of Russian “Battlespace” program is entering mass production, while some units are already receiving equipment!

Russian “Battlespace” is a counter to American NCO concept (network-centric operations), JV2010, Full Spectrum Dominance, and other projects that are still in the works or in testing stages.

Apparently the Russian system was developed by “Sozvezdie” (Constellation) concern, and was fully tested last year. Currently mass production is in preparation stage, while few elements are already being equipped all the way down to individual soldiers which are equipped with wrist wearable displays with integrated comm/gps capability.

Open architecture of the system is designed to accommodate easy future upgrades and integration of new technologies.

pix.lenta.ru..." target='_blank' class='tabOff'/>

As unreal as it seems, all of this neatly falls into place with seemingly small scale Russian UAV programs like tactical stealth Skat;

pix.lenta.ru..." target='_blank' class='tabOff'/>

short range (25 miles) “Tipchak”;

pix.lenta.ru..." target='_blank' class='tabOff'/>

all while delivery of large, new generation long range UAVs is slated for no later then 2011.

Unique hypersonic cruise missiles such as X-90 (AS 19 Koala ) are already capable of being delivered by TU-142s, while TU-160s are being actively modernized and upgraded.

www.sergib.agava.ru..." target='_blank' class='tabOff'/>

www.abovetopsecret.com...

This is where we simply can not ignore recent reactivation of Russian strategic bomber forces, most importantly the TU-160 Blackjack.

Then there are these troubling rumors. These are rumors, so don’t ask me for links.

VOLGA-DNEPR GROUP has delivered on what it has promised, and modernization of IL-76 fleet is going as planned;

www.volga-dnepr.com...

FIRST MODERNISED IL-76 EQUIPPED WITH NEW ENGINES SUCCESSFULLY COMPLETES INITIAL TEST FLIGHT

www.flug-revue.rotor.com...

After long discussions about the necessity to revive the Il-76 aircraft and retain it in the fleets, the Il-76 modernisation programme materialized in the contract with Volga-Dniepr air company on production and supply of the Il-76TD upgraded aircraft. In 2004 TAPOiCh in cooperation with Ilyushin Aviation Complex started realising the Il-76TD-90VD project envisaging installation of the PS-90 engines and advanced avionics system on the aircraft.

The PS-90 engines manufactured by Permskiye Motory joint stock company are mounted on the Il-96, Tu-204/214 and Il-76MF aircraft and are well-known by Russian operators. Besides compliance with ICAO noise and emission standards the engines have augmented power and reduced fuel consumption providing enhanced operational efficiency of the aircraft.

The re-motorized aircraft is also refitted with an improved avionics suite providing presentation of most flight data on four colour liquid-crystal displays, instead of analogue indicators and instruments, which helps to expand flight management functions, reduce pilots workload, improve flight cabin ergonomics and design.

www.airfleet.ru...

While the modernization program is a natural step, there have been rumors of multiple banks of rotary launchers being tested in the IL-76 airframe.

Rotary launchers vary in size, and while it is unknown what weapons they are designed to accommodate, some concerning speculations indicate that Russians are planning to take TOR-M2 and S-400 airborne as a part of their already existing “Battlespace” system.

The idea is the creation of the ultimate are-denial system, utilizing air-refueling capable IL-76 airframe to create a multilayered, airborne launching platform in order to counter the threat of attack by waves of stealth UAVs, as it is envisioned by USAF.

Air launched TOR-M2/S-400 missiles will have unmatched range, and with over-the-horizon radar coverage it will seriously compromise AWACS deployment, not to mention other basic functions.

Other then that, Russians did modernize their GPS system GLONASS, and are in the process of extending satellite life span to over 10 years.

Make your own conclusions, but from my point of view Russian Armed forces have been actively going through enormous, fundamental restructuring for over a decade, while in the West we still think they’re so poor that they can’t even fill the fuel tanks of what ever equipment they have left that did not rust into the ground.

Our media only covers the negative aspects of Russian efforts, and while we’re going bankrupt from wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, Russians have been very busy rebuilding their entire military industrial complex all while most Americans are simply unaware of this fact.

Make your own conclusions, but in my opinion it’s clear that all those oil dollars are not just disappearing into private bank accounts, but are being spent of creation of modern, 21st century Russian Armed Forces and we have to be aware of it.

Article in Russian are here, use online translators is needed;

www.lenta.ru...

www.lenta.ru...

www.lenta.ru...

lenta.ru...

www.lenta.ru...

lenta.ru...

Other sources;

www.dtic.mil...

www.comw.org...

cns.miis.edu...

WOW

Excellent find and thread! Starred and Flagged for the amzing info. and coherence of staying on topic!

Sooo, yes, i think that the Western military analysts should be watching Russia more carefully, now that they started to get their act straight on being modernized and re-planning.

But dont think that mainstream media of the West over here care;their more concerned about Britney Spears. Maybe it would get at most, a 10 sec. snippet of possible Russian increase in its budget for its military, but thats all (like on CNN or MSNBC).

Russia has always been a threat, but more recently not so. Their diploacy has increased significantly, been flexing their economic prowess in terms of oil, and strategizing their countrys comeback, and its been going good for them. They havnt, from my point of view, been a military threat, as the USA has taken that position for the world. Nevertheless, knowing Putin he wouldnt want the US to reign supreme forever, he wants Mother Russia back on top; igniting many political disputes with the US and others, more recently its alliance with Iran on the basis of its Nuclear program.

But now all of a sudden, this increase in military expenditure on a move alone strikes me as odd. Also, their exercises seeem to be stretching over more realistic events like bombings and using their ground military more effectivly. They also seem to be using their 2003 military doctrine reminescent of the US, in terms of how wars will be fought: limited and regional warfare, not like Cold War status full fleged wars.

Their major overhaul of creating a 21st cent. military is not feasible in the timeframe their hoping for, i think they said by at least 2011. Russia is strong, but not as technologically strong as the US, dont have the infrastructre capabilities to create such modern weaponry or ordnances IMO. But still, Russia is becoming a force to be reckoned with due to their overhaul.

Overall, this is all my opinion.

And thanks Iskander for this thread, amazingly written and very logical.





EDIT: By full fleged Cold Wars i meant the likes of Korea, Vietnam, and proxy wars (Afghanistan, etc.)

[edit on 4-11-2007 by jarheadjock]

Russia can be a threat but to who? When you look at it the US is very isolated and an invasion of any type would be extremely hard. Russia and China on the other hand have not been the best of friends ever and with China’s massive build up of their Navy since 1999 that has them on a course to rival the US Navy by 2016 I would think that maybe Russia is looking more towards China than the US.

I can see why the military strategists are so confused - i keep thinking about it and i can't figure out what the strategic importance of this is, there must be something that we can't see going on; perhaps elements of the russian military are corrupt and this is an effort to deal with the problem by cutting the plant off from it's roots, so to speak.

Perhaps there's something else going on, and this is merely a diversion - the cost of this venture warns me of the importance of this assessment...

Maybe it's a double-bluff.

Maybe it's a Triple-Bluff.

It won't be a Quadruple-Bluff, those things are like master-strokes used by people preparing to take over a country.

Maybe they're just flexing muscle.

There's too much that i can speculate about this, and that's the problem - undoubtedly it's got the military analysts confused about it.

At a deep, subvertive level being played out by master-strategists, it could be a case of litmus-testing the current capabilities of other strategists - although this could be a unforeseen advantage of what they're doing.

I 'know' i'm missing something.

[edit on 4-11-2007 by Throbber]

No offense but lets not be bashful and call it a spade. Most fluff I've ever read in years, much ado about nothing. Other than the reallocation story, which I will investigate myself to see how big a deal it is the rest is largely a personal narrative about conceptual subjects presented as fact supplemented by drawings and model images. Then there is the second part which cannot be linked to or supported, i.e. story telling, So to sum it all up, interesting theory and fascinating story, we’ll see how things play out.

Originally potted by iskander
Make your own conclusions...

Yes I think I will, see above... ^ Love the title though, very creative and dramatic.

[edit on 4-11-2007 by WestPoint23]

The reorganization of the military is just a part of the 16-years-and-counting reformation that started when the USSR collapsed. That alone is not something to be too concerned about, yet.

However, I will say that currently, Russia is makign incredible strides in becoming a legitimate military force. With its economy growing fast, the USSR seems to be able to avoid the financial problems that killed the USSR at the end of its life. In fact, I will argue Russia has emerged better than ever.

Popular culture says the U.S. won the Cold War. I think history says they won...

reply to post by Throbber

I can see why the military strategists are so confused - i keep thinking about it and i can't figure out what the strategic importance of this is, there must be something that we can't see going on; perhaps elements of the russian military are corrupt and this is an effort to deal with the problem by cutting the plant off from it's roots, so to speak.

When it comes to Russian Navy relocation, yes, it does look tome that Putin wants to shake up the entire Navy from ground up like Peter the Great did.

The best way to deal with corruption is to start new, and this relocation really does seem like it is what‘s going on.

Perhaps there's something else going on, and this is merely a diversion - the cost of this venture warns me of the importance of this assessment...

Maybe it's a double-bluff.

Maybe it's a Triple-Bluff.

Considering the budget involved and knowing past lessons of Russian ways of doing things, it’s HIGHLY unlikely that they’ll dump so much money away on a bluff.

We also must remember that for every dollar spent in Russia on mil budget, about 7 are spent in US. That’s the approximate ratio.

Maybe they're just flexing muscle.

There's too much that i can speculate about this, and that's the problem - undoubtedly it's got the military analysts confused about it.

Again, too much money spent on a PR muscle flexing campaign. I’ll wait to see what the analysts will officially come up with, and it usually takes them a few months to coordinate.

At a deep, subvertive level being played out by master-strategists, it could be a case of litmus-testing the current capabilities of other strategists - although this could be a unforeseen advantage of what they're doing.

I 'know' i'm missing something.

I felt that way for years. Ever since I became aware that when a barrel of oil was $50, and for every $1 increase Russians made an extra billion US dollars per DAY, I couldn’t help it wonder where all that money was going when their entire military budget is classified.

reply to post by WestPoint23

the rest is largely a personal narrative about conceptual subjects presented as fact supplemented by drawings and model images.

WestPoint23, we’ve been over this before. Since I can read Russian, I regularly keep updated on their news, and as I clearly advised, use automatic online translators to translate the Russian OPEN media sources I’ve provided.

Then there is the second part which cannot be linked to or supported, i.e. story telling, So to sum it all up, interesting theory and fascinating story, we’ll see how things play out.

For that you do have to research a bit.

Burlak-m/Burlak Diana projects were conceptualized along with a use of a network of airborne long range SAM missiles carried in modular rotary launchers.

Such launchers are the roll on roll of type, and do not require airframe modification just as Burlak design.

Yes I think I will, see above... ^ Love the title though, very creative and dramatic.

Dramatic? Think if NONE of US media sources would even mention if USN cleared out of Pentagon!

Honestly, have you seen even a SNIPPET in the news about Russia lately, not mentioning their Navy relocating?

I’ve seen absolutely NOTHING ANYWHERE!

Every one keeps looking at the old ways of thinking. Centralized control means just one target. Russia doesn't think of the USA in terms of any enemy any more than we think of them in those terms. We are well know to them and they to us.

I think Russia has finally realized that other countries are coming into missiles and nuclear capability that they have no real control over from treaties or even threat of retaliation. Iran is first and foremost with Pakistan right behind them. They have a radical Islam problem just as the rest of the Western world does.

The cooperation that Russia has with India on several fronts is interesting from the Pakistan view. This thought line is for a different thread.

Anyway, decentralization of command and control of the Russian military gives them a better opportunity to hit someone back who tries to decapitate the military.

Just a thought or two....

reply to post by sweatmonicaIdo

The reorganization of the military is just a part of the 16-years-and-counting reformation that started when the USSR collapsed. That alone is not something to be too concerned about, yet.

I think it’s a good time to start getting concerned, or at least talk about it.

However, I will say that currently, Russia is makign incredible strides in becoming a legitimate military force. With its economy growing fast, the USSR seems to be able to avoid the financial problems that killed the USSR at the end of its life. In fact, I will argue Russia has emerged better than ever.

I’ve been there for 6 months and came back in July. Yes, indeed I was utterly surprised by how fast they have bounced back.

The sheer amount of even civilian construction was overwhelming, not to mention the rebuilding of their infrastructure and military industrial complex.

Popular culture says the U.S. won the Cold War. I think history says they won...

I’ve asked a few Russian about that one, and every one of them said that Russians in general are incredibly resentful of how the “velvet” revolution was named by the West as a Cold War victory.

I heard the same thing over and over again, and they kept saying that it’s the Russian people that went onto the streets and demanded for resignation of Politburo, that Muscovites built barricades on the streets and prevented tanks from entering into the heart of the city.

They are justifiably angry, because THEIR revolution was stolen from them and labeled as a Cold War victory for the Reagan administration, even though EVERYBODY was stunned when the Berlin wall unexpectedly came down.

That’s their view on things, and the new generation couldn’t care less about the Soviet days, they are busy making money, being independent and giving America a run for its money, that’s their current interests, so no wonder they are rebuilding so fast.

Very good info, thanks for posting.

Did I read right "Russians are planning to take TOR-M2 and S-400 airborne?"

That is very interesting. How would that be deployed?

It seems the Russians are definitely catching up to the West.

reply to post by on_yur_6

Did I read right "Russians are planning to take TOR-M2 and S-400 airborne?"

Also Buk-M2, basically the entire SAM network concept.

That is very interesting. How would that be deployed?

As a part of their “Battlespace” system. For the lack of aircraft carriers, it looks like their approach to airspace control projection.

Area denial through long range airborne patrols with mid-flight refueling capability.

Vympels new R-37M uses 9B-1388 active/semi-active seeker head, which was specifically designed with a universal ability to be uses on air-to-air missiles and SAMs.

KS-172 LRAAM and Novator K-100 are in the same long range category.

Since modern SAM seekers are dual mode, apparently there are no complications taking them airborne.

Especially the Novator can be traced directly to the SAM family of missiles;

www.ausairpower.net..." target='_blank' class='tabOff'/>

Very good Australian article here talking about Novator bureau going airborne;

The Novator bureau, better known for the S-300V/SA-12 Gladiator/Giant long range SAMs and the 3M-54/SS-N-27 Sizzler cruise missile, soon followed with a competing proposal for the R-172 (formerly KS-172) AAM-L very long range missile. Like the R-37, the R-172 was developed as a counter ISR missile. The missile employs an active radar seeker and inertial midcourse guidance. Two configurations are known, with and without a booster pack. With the booster the missile is claimed to achieve a range of 215 NMI, without 160 NMI. Cited seeker performance is similar to the R-37.

www.ausairpower.net...

In fact, their seekers are almost identical.

And yet another excellent Australian article;

In the long range missile domain, the Vympel R-37 (AA-X-13) series of AIM-54 Phoenix look-alikes have been proposed - a developmental R-37 successfully engaged a target at 162 nautical miles of A-pole range in 1996. A more interesting proposal has been the use of the Novator R(KS)-172 RVV-L (AAM-L) missile, a 215 nautical mile range 1,650 lb launch weight long range AAM. The R-172 uses datalink/inertial midcourse guidance and an active radar terminal seeker, and Russian sources claim a snap-up capability to 100,000 ft and snap-down capability to 10 ft AGL. KS-172 mockups have been photographed on Su-30 displays but its production status is unclear at this time, although India is negotiating licence production.

www.ausairpower.net...

www.ausairpower.net..." target='_blank' class='tabOff'/>

Everything points to a flexible, standardized/interchangeable SAM/air-to-air platform.

I thought the Russian Military were broke. Where is the money coming for all these upgrades and relocations etc etc?

Originally posted by iskander
I’ve been there for 6 months and came back in July. Yes, indeed I was utterly surprised by how fast they have bounced back.

The sheer amount of even civilian construction was overwhelming, not to mention the rebuilding of their infrastructure and military industrial complex.

It really must be a sight to see.

I’ve asked a few Russian about that one, and every one of them said that Russians in general are incredibly resentful of how the “velvet” revolution was named by the West as a Cold War victory.

I heard the same thing over and over again, and they kept saying that it’s the Russian people that went onto the streets and demanded for resignation of Politburo, that Muscovites built barricades on the streets and prevented tanks from entering into the heart of the city.

They are justifiably angry, because THEIR revolution was stolen from them and labeled as a Cold War victory for the Reagan administration, even though EVERYBODY was stunned when the Berlin wall unexpectedly came down.

That’s their view on things, and the new generation couldn’t care less about the Soviet days, they are busy making money, being independent and giving America a run for its money, that’s their current interests, so no wonder they are rebuilding so fast.

That pretty much takes the case and is the essence of why there is so much resentment towards the U.S. in general. Even the late President Gerald Ford stated that he was "angry" that Reagan and his people were taking so much credit and thumping their chests for somethign he believed they were not responsible for. Ford believed the USSR did itself in and that the American people and the people of the Soviet Union were the ones who deserved the credit. And President Ford was right.

By the next decade, we will have to get used to the idea that while the USSR lost, Russia won. Big time.

reply to post by psteel

I thought the Russian Military were broke. Where is the money coming for all these upgrades and relocations etc etc?

Gas guzzlers. Oil and natural gas money, and massive amounts of it. For every dollar the price of oil goes up, the Russians make an extra billion.

reply to post by sweatmonicaIdo

Even the late President Gerald Ford stated that he was "angry" that Reagan and his people were taking so much credit and thumping their chests for somethign he believed they were not responsible for. Ford believed the USSR did itself in and that the American people and the people of the Soviet Union were the ones who deserved the credit. And President Ford was right.

By the next decade, we will have to get used to the idea that while the USSR lost, Russia won. Big time.

Exactly. Back in the 90s I was appalled from the lack of cooperation with the new Russian government. While we dumped billions into relations with other natural resource rich nations, we literally refused to cooperate with the new Russian government of those days, and now we’re paying the price for it.

Instead of having a war in Iraq we could have very lucrative, long term contracts with Russian energy companies but now it’s China that has them, while we literally burn money on Iraq.

Originally posted by iskander
Exactly. Back in the 90s I was appalled from the lack of cooperation with the new Russian government. While we dumped billions into relations with other natural resource rich nations, we literally refused to cooperate with the new Russian government of those days, and now we’re paying the price for it.

Instead of having a war in Iraq we could have very lucrative, long term contracts with Russian energy companies but now it’s China that has them, while we literally burn money on Iraq.

Not to sound like a Russia-sympathizer, but they might have gotten the short end of the stick. Because they will have oil and natural gas next decade and because the geopolitical situation will lead them to support Iran, Russia has inadvertedly made itself into a "villain." look for anti-Russian rhetoric to have a market.

reply to post by sweatmonicaIdo

Not to sound like a Russia-sympathizer, but they might have gotten the short end of the stick. Because they will have oil and natural gas next decade and because the geopolitical situation will lead them to support Iran, Russia has inadvertedly made itself into a "villain." look for anti-Russian rhetoric to have a market.

I would not say so. They are in the best situation they could have hoped for. As to posturing with Iran, they could not care less about what the West thinks, and the “villain” image has been cultivated by the right wingers for years.

Facts are simple, with out Russian natural gas Europe will go dark, and with out Russian oil the economies of both China and US will take a massive hit.

Chinese are currently in the process of “restructuring” of 1.3 trillion dollars of US dept, simply because they could no longer risk the dollar dropping even lower.

Industrial use of petroleum products is far greater then consumer, and while public transition will inevitably reach zero emission threshold, industrial use of petrochemicals will keep the need for oil for decades to come.

All the anti-Russian rhetoric in the world will not make a dent when global industry simply needs their oil in order to function.

Originally posted by hinky
Every one keeps looking at the old ways of thinking.

Every one might be opting for believing the most commonly heard propaganda but that does not have much to do with 'old ways' of thinking!

Centralized control means just one target.

Lol! Back in 1512 maybe but modern strategic weapons ensures that there is a very certain chain of command that can simply not be taken out in the way some suggests.

Russia doesn't think of the USA in terms of any enemy any more than we think of them in those terms.

So their building the F-22's to fight China or 'terrorist'. Sure i can believe that corporate types are simply lining their pockets but the Bush administration does seem addament that there is a 'terrorist threat'.

"Q: Let me ask you specifically about last week's scare here in Washington, and what we might have learned from how prepared we are to deal with that (inaudible), at B'nai Brith.

A: Well, it points out the nature of the threat. It turned out to be a false threat under the circumstances. But as we've learned in the intelligence community, we had something called -- and we have James Woolsey here to perhaps even address this question about phantom moles. The mere fear that there is a mole within an agency can set off a chain reaction and a hunt for that particular mole which can paralyze the agency for weeks and months and years even, in a search. The same thing is true about just the false scare of a threat of using some kind of a chemical weapon or a biological one. There are some reports, for example, that some countries have been trying to construct something like an Ebola Virus, and that would be a very dangerous phenomenon, to say the least. Alvin Toeffler has written about this in terms of some scientists in their laboratories trying to devise certain types of pathogens that would be ethnic specific so that they could just eliminate certain ethnic groups and races; and others are designing some sort of engineering, some sort of insects that can destroy specific crops. Others are engaging even in an eco- type of terrorism whereby they can alter the climate, set off earthquakes, volcanoes remotely through the use of electromagnetic waves."

So there are plenty of ingenious minds out there that are at work finding ways in which they can wreak terror upon other nations. It's real, and that's the reason why we have to intensify our efforts, and that's why this is so important.

DoD News Briefing
Secretary of Defense William S. Cohen

And 'terrorist' that can apparently alter the climate and set of earthquakes. The must have had a lot of batteries and high tech stuff in those caves in Afghanistan...

We are well know to them and they to us.

Since the CIA either funded them or the state department set up policies that would create hatred for US foreign policy.

I think Russia has finally realized that other countries are coming into missiles and nuclear capability that they have no real control over from treaties or even threat of retaliation.

Immediately prior to the signing of the ABM treaty, the Soviets had developed a surface-to-air missile, the SA-5, which was observed to have a peculiar trajectory. The SA-5 was fired high above the atmosphere and then would descend to intercept and destroy enemy bombers. While technically such a trajectory could not be ruled out, logically, however, it could not be accepted as this type of trajectory represents the least efficient way to shoot down enemy aircraft. On the other hand, the SA-5?s trajectory would be just the ticket for shooting down incoming ballistic missiles which themselves travel above the atmosphere. Taking this into account, the SA-5 had to be an ABM weapon. But with the ABM treaty almost in hand, this fact was ignored and the treaty went into effect. The treaty remains in effect, limiting development of a U.S. ABM system. Meanwhile, Russian dual-purpose (anti-aircraft/anti-missile) missile systems like the SA-5 continue to exist.

www.thenewamerican.com/node/1076

However, Soviet and Russian sources, including former Premier Alexei Kosygin and the Chief Designer of the original Moscow ABM system, confirm that: the SA-5 and SA-10 were dual purpose antiaircraft/missile systems (SAM/ABMs), and that the Hen House and LPAR radars provided the requisite battle management target tracking data. These and other sources cited in The ABM Treaty Charade are not exhaustive.

Nevertheless, CIA has not revised its position on this issue, nor have the U.S. Congress and the public been informed that the ABM Treaty was a valid contract from beginning to end.

In the late 1960s the U.S. sacrificed its 20-year technological advantage in ABM defenses on the altar of "arms control." As Russian sources now admit, the Soviet General Staff was in total control of Soviet "arms control" proposals and negotiations, subject to Politburo review, which was largely pro forma. The Soviet military's objective was to gain as much advantage as possible from "arms control" agreements (SALT).

www.jinsa.org...

Mr. Lee's analysis is complex. To vastly simplify, he says he has evidence that Russia's surface-to-air interceptor missiles carry nuclear warheads and therefore are capable of bringing down long-range ballistic missiles, not just aircraft and shorter-range missiles, which is their stated purpose. Russia has 8,000 of these missiles scattered around the country, and Mr. Lee says he has found numerous Russian sources that describe how successive generations of SAMs were in fact designed with the express intention of shooting down ballistic missiles, which is illegal under the treaty.

www.opinionjournal.com...

So neither China or Iran can build sufficient BM's to do Russia any harm and if it's a question of nuclear material smuggling that is issue for border security and diplomacy.

Iran is first and foremost with Pakistan right behind them. They have a radical Islam problem just as the rest of the Western world does.

The west does not have a radical 'islam problem' as much as a it has enemies it created trough it's foreign policy actions that are not being allowed any other way to organize in. Since the only route that is left wide open happens to be radical religion that's where many end up. The fact that the CIA is responsible for much of the vitality of the original Fundamentalist should obviously come as no surprise.

The cooperation that Russia has with India on several fronts is interesting from the Pakistan view. This thought line is for a different thread.

So the Pakistanis is going to do what exactly? Do you think Musharraf has some kind of support within Pakistan?

Stellar