The Rise of the Russian Empire: Russo-Armenian Relations

[Armenian]

Re: The Rise of the Russian Empire: Russo-Armenian Relations

From what I have read the threat of the missle defense shield is in relation to first strike capability. I believe that propoganda in the US tends to underestimate US capabilities. So if hypothetically US missle defense can intercept 50% of launched missles then some people may consider it a victory if the US were to engage in a first strike against Russia. The biggest threat from Moscow would be the mobile launchers and subs. I am not saying this is what I would do, I am just pointing out the concerns of some analysts with a US missle defense system, especially one deployed in Eastern Europe.

You are more-or-less correct in your assessments, gmd. I posted the following recently:

1) The American missile defense shield is in fact an offensive shield.

By the late 1990s the Russian military was so degraded that it was nearing a dangerous point where a sudden first strike by NATO forces could disable it's nuclear deterrence. In theory, a missile shield positioned around Russia would stop the launching of any ICBMs that survived the initial strike. Thus, there was a window of opportunity, a time when Russia was vulnerable to a first strike, according to some military analysts in the West. This is how the plan to encircle Russia with anti-missile systems came into being after the fall of the Soviet Union. With Putin's rise to power, however, this window of opportunity began to shrink quite fast. But it's not fully closed yet. A significant threat to Russia remains today and this threat is the main reason why Moscow has been for the past two years placing all its emphasis on restrengthening its strategic nuclear forces.

2) The greatest longterm threat to the West is not China - it's a free and patriotic Russia.

Most Americans have difficulty understanding this. Americans tend think that China is the gravest longterm threat to American/Western power without realizing that China and the West are financially codependents, they are interlocked in a economic union that neither side will jeopardize. The political establishment here in the US, however, knows full well that the only free, competitive, self-sufficient nation-state with vast reserves (natural and monetary) and a massive nuclear arsenal is the Russian Federation. The national interests of Russia directly interferes with the global interests of the West. A free Russia is the number one obstacle to the West's total global hegemony.

Related articles:

US conducts successful missile defence test

Pentagon Shoots Down Missile in Simulated Attack: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U3r7AL_hLQQ

The US has successfully conducted a test of its missile defence systems. A spokesman for the US military said a missile launched from Kodiak island in the northern most-state of Alaska was destroyed by an interceptor launched from California, on the country's lower west coast. The Pentagon said 12 tests had been carried out on the system since 1999 out of which seven had been successful. Relations between the US and Russia have been strained by the US' plans to place a missile defence system in Poland and the Czech Republic, former parts of the Soviet Union. Russia fears that the systems placed in its neighbouring countries could be used to target it in the future, while the US maintains that they are to counter the threat posed by rogue states and do not have Russia in mind. Russia has threatened to place missile systems pointing at its neighbours in Kaliningrad in response to the US plans.

Source: http://www.inthenews.co.uk/news/worl...e-defence-test

Was US anti-missile test aimed at Russia and China?

A consultant to the head of Russia's Strategic Rocket Forces has said that a simulated anti-missile test by the U.S. was not aimed at stopping a North Korean threat as Washington had claimed. Colonel-general Viktor Yesin said last Friday’s test had China and Russia in mind. He said: “To avoid agitating public opinion, U.S. Missile Defense Agency officials say the test was aimed at intercepting North Korean and Iranian rockets. But we missile specialists understand that it was in fact aimed at stopping Russian and Chinese intercontinental missiles.” During the test last Friday an interceptor rocket was launched from California to knock down a missile launched from Alaska. America spends some $US 10 billion a year on an anti-missile network claiming it's necessary to counteract growing threats from ‘rogue nations’ such as North Korea and Iran.

Source: http://www.russiatoday.com/news/news/34443

[Armenian]

Re: The Rise of the Russian Empire: Russo-Armenian Relations

And this, initially posted by Zoravar.

NATO scuttles US plan to encircle Russia

North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) ministers in Brussels have decided to ignore the wishes of the United States and delay the admission of Georgia and the Ukraine, in effect indefinitely, in what the George W Bush administration is sheepishly trying to claim is a positive "compromise".

The decision, follows the alarm which peaked among European Union member states last August over the prospect of having to go to war with Russia over an erratic leader in the Caucasus who had provoked Moscow into a reaction.

The Germans have a far too deep and painful collective memory of the last war with Russia to be willing to treat the prospect as lightly as US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice or Washington has. The decision deepens growing fault lines across the Atlantic, and next year will be clearly more turbulent even than 2008 in terms of global geopolitics.

The Brussels decision is even more remarkable if taken as indication of Washington's diminishing power over European NATO members. The NATO Foreign Ministers meeting on December 3 issued what to the naive observer might appear a masterpiece of diplomacy.

They unanimously agreed to sidestep the usual Membership Action Plan vote for Georgia and Ukraine, the first concrete step towards full membership of NATO. Instead, NATO will expand the activities of two existing bodies - the NATO-Georgia Commission and the NATO-Ukraine Commission - basically to oversee the same reforms as would have been contained in the action plan. NATO ministers also agreed in their communique to renew ties with Russia "in a conditional and graduated manner".

Translated into real political language, Washington has undergone a stunning setback in its agenda of encircling Russia with NATO. Despite the fact that president-elect Obama retained Bush Administration Defense Secretary Robert Gates, and named a person to be Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, who has strongly supported bringing Georgia and Ukraine into NATO, key European NATO members, led by Germany and France, blocked what must be a unanimous membership decision.

The real reasons

The real reason for the refusal is the growing realization within European officialdom that it was Georgia's unpredictable President Mikhail Saakashvili, not Moscow, who first sent Georgian troops into the breakaway province of South Ossetia, after getting a go-ahead from Washington.

On November 28, during Georgian official Parliamentary Commission testimony on the background to the August events, Saakashvili made the surprising announcement that he had indeed initiated the war.

According to Saakashvili, the attack on the South Ossetian capital, which involved night shelling of residential areas with multiple rocket launcher systems, was aimed at protecting Georgian citizens. He said it was a response to Russia's "intervention" in the region.

"We did start military action to take control of Tskhinvali and other unruly areas. But we took this difficult decision to fend off our territory from intervention and save the people who were dying. It was inevitable," Saakashvili said.

The Georgian president claims Russia moved tanks into South Ossetian territory before Georgia launched its attack. He said: "The issue is not about why Georgia started military action - we admit we started it. The issue is about whether there was another chance when our citizens were being killed? We tried to prevent the intervention and fought on our own territory."

Saakashvili's surprising admission came only hours after the testimony of Georgia's former ambassador to Moscow, Erosi Kitsmarishvili, who had testified for three hours before he was shouted down by pro-Saakashvili members of parliament.

A former confidant of Saakashvili, Kitsmarishvili said Georgian officials told him in April that they planned to start a war in Abkhazia, one of two breakaway regions at issue in the war, and had received a green light from the United States government to do so. He said the Georgian government later decided to start the war in South Ossetia, the other region, and continue into Abkhazia.

He refused to name the officials who told him about planned actions in Abkhazia, as identifying them would endanger their lives. The official US line has been that they had "warned" Saakashvili against taking action in the two enclaves, where Russian peacekeepers were stationed.

Kitsmarishvili's testimony in front of the parliamentary commission was shown live on Georgian television. The chairman of the commission, Paata Davitaia, said he would initiate a criminal case against Kitsmarishvili for "professional negligence". Deputy Foreign Minister Giga Bokeria, who was called on short notice to comment on Kitsmarishvili's testimony, called the allegations an "irresponsible and shameless fabrication", adding they were "either the result of a lack of information or the personal resentment of a man who has lost his job and wants to get involved in politics". Kitsmarishvili was fired in September by the president.

Kitsmarishvili walked out amid the furor last week. "They don't want to listen to the truth," he told reporters. Two days later, Saakashvili proved Kitsmarishvili right.

Full spectrum dominance

As I detail at some length in my book, due out in January 2009, Full Spectrum Dominance: Totalitarian Democracy in the New World Order, the strategy of bringing Georgia and Ukraine into NATO is part of a far larger and more dangerous strategic long-term plan of Washington to ultimately encircle, confront and dismember Russia as a functioning state. Russia, even more than China, is the most formidable obstacle to a Washington-centered sole superpower, Pax Americana.

Russia's understandable refusal to abandon its nuclear strike force in the face of US violations of agreements made in 1989 between the Soviet Union's Mikhail Gorbachev and then US secretary of state James Baker III, namely that NATO would not expand east to the former states of the Warsaw Pact or USSR, presents a dilemma for any plans for sole US superpower domination.

The Bush presidency was a raw attempt to remedy this by brute military force. The militarization of Iraq and the Middle East oil fields was but one step. The creation of a US 'missile shield' in Poland and the Czech Republic, was another, major step.

The misnamed "missile defense shield" would in reality be an offensive capability that when installed by perhaps 2012, will put the world, especially Western Europe on a hair-trigger to nuclear war. When combined with the entry of Russian border states Georgia and Ukraine to NATO this would simply present Moscow with de facto defeat. This is not about Russia returning to old Soviet-style rule under Putin or Medvedev. It's about the ultimate survival of Russia as a nation, as Moscow rightly sees it, not about the finer points of democracy.

No one in either Berlin, Paris, London nor Brussels, and certainly not in Washington, is ignorant of that reality. European NATO members are increasingly nervous about the prospect of a military confrontation with Russia. Last August's swift Russian response to act in aid of South Ossetians against the Georgian invasion sent a reality shock through Europe. Neither Germany nor France wish to admit unstable states like Georgia or Ukraine only to be forced to act militarily in their defense in event of a repeat of the madness of last August.

That, simply stated, is the real, unspoken reason that Washington on December 3 in Brussels was forced to accept a face-saving compromise. The NATO membership of Georgia and Ukraine to all intent and purposes is dead. As one NATO military official stated, "NATO has lost the glue that once held it together." The statement of Rice following the NATO meeting was telling. She was forced to tell press, "... there is a long road ahead for both Georgia and Ukraine to reach those standards. The United States stands resolutely for those standards, meaning that there should be no shortcuts to membership of NATO." Rice added.

Polish motorcade shoot was 'Georgia stunt'

Further adding to the atmosphere of almost Laurel and Hardy comic farce surrounding Georgia's erratic president - who was filmed shortly after the Russian invasion in August by BBC actually swallowing and chewing on his tie - it has now emerged that an alleged shooting incident a week before the Brussels NATO meeting, which involved the motorcade of the Georgian and Polish presidents, was a staged "stunt".

Special services in Warsaw say the alleged attack near the South Ossetian border was a provocation staged by the Georgians. A report by Poland's Internal Security Agency - the Agencja Bezpieczenstwa Wewnetrznego (ABW), published by the Dziennik newspaper, claims Georgia staged the incident for propaganda purposes.

The incident took place on Sunday evening when Saakashvili was showing his Polish counterpart Lech Kaczynski the area near the border with South Ossetia. After the convoy stopped at a checkpoint, there was gunfire, which the Georgians claimed was an "attack by Russian troops".

Lech Kaczynski's personal security chief, Colonel Krzysztof Olszowiec, was accused of failing to ensure proper security for the president during his trip to Georgia and dismissed despite objections from Kaczynski, according to the Polish media.

The trip to the border area with Russian-backed South Ossetia was the result of a last-minute invitation from Saakashvili, according to Polish Foreign Ministry spokesman Piotr Paskowski.
Initially, Warsaw blamed Russia for the incident. But now Polish security forces say it was staged by Tbilisi. Russia had strongly denied the allegations, saying Tbilisi was behind it. President Kaczynski confirmed that shooting had taken place but stopped short of blaming anyone. Russia's position has now been supported by Poland's ABW, who said "the shots fired near the cars of Georgian and Polish president were a Georgian provocation". The Polish document points out that Saakashvili kept on smiling after the first shots and his bodyguards didn't react.

The report also highlights another suspicious fact, namely, that the bus carrying journalists was instructed to travel in front of the motorcade, while the car with Kaczynski's own bodyguards was pushed back by Georgian soldiers. The result was that they were not in a position to witness the alleged shooting.

All-in-all, it might be Saakashvili's tenure as president that faces major internal challeges over his bent for undertaking such reckless stunts.

F William Engdahl is author of A Century of War: Anglo-American Oil Politics (Pluto Press), and the book, Seeds of Destruction: The Hidden Agenda of Genetic Manipulation (www.globalresearch.ca). His new book, Full Spectrum Dominance: Totalitarian Democracy in the New World Order (Third Millennium Press) is due out late January 2009. He may be reached through his website, www.engdahl.oilgeopolitics.net.

Source: http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Central_Asia/JL09Ag01.html

[gmd]

Re: The Rise of the Russian Empire: Russo-Armenian Relations

I think contrary to popular myth, nuclear weapons/war are no longer viewed as a doomsday scenario in all circles. Most people have forgotten "Alas, Babylon". The more I learn the more I am convinced the US (having used atomic bombs) may not have the same qualms about using nukes as other nations.

[Armenian]

Re: The Rise of the Russian Empire: Russo-Armenian Relations

For the last few years, news of supplying Iran with S-300 air defense system are surfacing every now and then.

I am somehow believing that this has to do with the US anti-ballistic missile project in Poland and the Czech Republic. It looks like it is being used by the Russians as a bargaining chip. If the US goes ahead with the ABM installations, then one of Russia's counters will be the immediate supply to Iran of S-300 and other weapon systems that so far they were witholding. If the Americans cancel that project, then the Iranians will have to wait forever for the S-300s.

What is your opinion Armenian?

The Israeli news source I posted suggests just that. Looking at it from this perspective, yes, it now seems very likely that Moscow has been using their S-300 air defense system as a bargaining chip in their bid to stop the anti-missile shield deployment in eastern Europe by the US. However, it's not Moscow's only bargaining chip. At the very least I hope not because one does not even begin to compare with the other. Consider what the US anti-missile shield is meant to accomplish - make possible a theoretical nuclear first strike on Russia. And then consider what the S-300 delivery to Tehran is meant to accomplish - simply protect Iran from US and/or Israeli aggression. Compared to the S-300 appearing in Iran, a US missile shield appearing in eastern Europe takes on epic, even sinister proportions. So, the S-300 is not that much of a bargaining tool against the US after all. The fundamental problem here is this: Mutually Assured Destruction, the idea that both sides would get annihilated in a nuclear holocaust was the primary deterrence that kept the peace during the Cold War. This deterrence factor was weakened somewhat after the fall of the Soviet Union when the Russian military fell into severe disarray. The West, US in particular, has been smelling blood. It would be in the West's interests to kill the pray before it gets back up on its feet. It's obvious that Moscow is in a real panic over this situation and rightfully so. Had they known that their missile systems could easily counter the threat posed by the US simply by introducing new missile systems or repositioning their existing ones, Moscow would not be reacting they they have been. In my opinion, Moscow is scared because it has a vulnerability that Washington seems to be exploiting. It would be interesting to know what's their main concern, what specifically is their vulnerability. While it's important for Moscow to modernize its army, it's crucially important for them to concentrate on producing more nuclear powered ballistic missile submarines. They would also need secure naval centers around the world for their submarines to utilize. As scary as it may sound, the only thing that would stop a major US aggression against Russia at this point is a bunch of modern ICBM equipped Russian submarines constantly lurking close to US territorial waters.

[jgk3]

Re: The Rise of the Russian Empire: Russo-Armenian Relations

As scary as it may sound, the only thing that would stop a major US aggression against Russia at this point is a bunch of modern ICBM equipped Russian submarines constantly lurking close to US territorial waters.

Wow, that is a thought provoking point.

[ZORAVAR]

Re: The Rise of the Russian Empire: Russo-Armenian Relations

Compared to the S-300 appearing in Iran, a US missile shield appearing in eastern Europe takes on epic, even sinister proportions. So, the S-300 is not that much of a bargaining tool against the US after all. The fundamental problem here is this: Mutually Assured Destruction, the idea that both sides would get annihilated in a nuclear holocaust was the primary deterrence that kept the peace during the Cold War. This deterrence factor was weakened somewhat after the fall of the Soviet Union when the Russian military fell into severe disarray. The West, US in particular, has been smelling blood. It would be in the West's interests to kill the pray before it gets back up on its feet. It's obvious that Moscow is in a real panic over this situation and rightfully so. Had they known that their missile systems could easily counter the threat posed by the US simply by introducing new missile systems or repositioning their existing ones, Moscow would not be reacting they they have been. In my opinion, Moscow is scared because it has a vulnerability that Washington seems to be exploiting. It would be interesting to know what's their main concern, what specifically is their vulnerability.

"Sinister proportions" indeed. You have a talent to choose the most appropriate words.

Here are some details for you on the subject of nuclear deterence:

Yes, it is obvious that the USA is trying to undermine MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction). Those ABM missiles in Poland and Alaska are the beginning of a carefully planned "Star Wars" program that is now being implemented. What has hurt the Russians most is the fact that they lost part of their Intercontinential Missile building facilities (they were in Ukraine). Their current arsenal of old SS-18, SS-19 etc. is ageing and being gradually retired from service as they reach their "expiry date". The new TOPOL missiles are not being built fast enough to replace them on one to one basis. So total numbers of missiles available is going to be less in the future. The lowest point will be reached sometime during the next decade. That is the window of opportunity that the US is seing. Enough ABM systems to neutralize most of a Russian counterstike....A nightmarish situation for the Russians where they can no longer deter the USA from launching a nuclear attack on Russia because their counterstrike will not be damaging enough.

In short, a devastating American first strike may be able to destroy a significant chunk of the Russian ICBMs and SLBMs on the ground and ports. With the ABMs shooting down most of the surviving missiles from the Russian counterstrike... The Americans may be tempted... that is panicking the Russian leadership.

Well aware of the situation, the Russians are spending a large chunk of their defense budget on nuclear forces. That is why strategic force modernization is being given top priority by the Russian Leadership. They are trying to build TOPOL-M mobile missiles as fast as the factory can. They are also testing a new missile that they claim is immune to ABM systems...In addition, a new class of submarines (Yury Dolgoruky) carrying a new type of Submarine launched ballistic missile (BULAVA) is about to enter service.

Also, the Russians are not placing all their bets on ICBMs and SLBMs. Putin annouced early this year that they are restarting production of Tu-160 (Blackjack) strategic bombers. The rate is very slow (about one per year). With their cruise missiles, these should help maintain their strategic deterrent.

In the air, the Russians have one thing in their favour: The START 1 treaty is about to expire. One of the closes of that treaty stipulated that the Russians (Soviets) remove inflight refueling probes from their smaller Tu-22M (Backfire) bombers. Once the treaty expires, they will be able to re-install the equipment and have these bombers available to give a hand to the larger bombers in strategic duties.

One very clever move that the Russians did is to invest in the development of the KH-101 (conventional warhead) and KH-102 (nuclear warhead) stealth cruise missiles. They are at the final stages of testing and should enter service soon. With their 5000 km range these bomber carried weapons are practically immune to defenses. They are a good way to ensure that no one tries anything foolish against Russia. Again this program is very costly.

Here are photos of the still secret and mysterious KH-101/102 undetectable cruise missiles carried by a Tu-95 (Bear) bomber during the test program.

While it's important for Moscow to modernize its army, it's crucially important for them to concentrate on producing more nuclear powered ballistic missile submarines. They would also need secure naval centers around the world for their submarines to utilize. As scary as it may sound, the only thing that would stop a major US aggression against Russia at this point is a bunch of modern ICBM equipped Russian submarines constantly lurking close to US territorial waters

Russian submarines can launch their SLBMs from their territorial waters. Their 8000+ km range is enough to reach the USA. Unlike the earlier years of the cold war, the subs do not need to patrol close to US waters.

Having said that, there are recent reports that the Russians are planning to convert their remaining 3 TYPHOON class SLBM carrying submarines into cruise missile carriers. These gigantic subs are now in storage because they are left without missiles (because the factory that produced their type of missiles is now in the Ukraine). The most likely model of the cruise missile is an expected naval version of the stealthy KH-101 and KH-102. That would be another clever investment that would further guarantee the strategic deterrent. In that case, these subs will have to patrol closer to the USA as the range of their weapons is only 5000km.

[Tigranakert]

Re: The Rise of the Russian Empire: Russo-Armenian Relations

Russia starts missile delivery to Iran: Iranian MP

Reuters
Sunday, December 21, 2008; 9:45 AM

TEHRAN (Reuters) - Russia has begun delivering S-300 air defense systems to Iran which could help repel any Israeli and U.S. air strikes on its nuclear sites, the official IRNA news agency reported on Sunday.

"After few years of talks with Russia ... now the S-300 system is being delivered to Iran," IRNA quoted Email Kosari, deputy head of parliament's Foreign Affairs and National Security committee, as saying.

Kosari did not say when the deliveries began. Iran's Foreign Ministry declined to comment on the report. Russia's Foreign Ministry also declined comment, saying it may react on Monday.

The United States, its European allies and Israel say Iran is seeking to build nuclear arms under the cover of a civilian atomic energy program. Iran denies the charge.

Israel's insistence that Iran must not be allowed to develop an atomic bomb has fueled speculation that the xxxish state, widely assumed to have the Middle East's only nuclear arsenal, could mount its own pre-emptive strikes.

In October, Russia's Foreign Ministry denied media speculation that Moscow would sell the medium-range S-300 system, adding Moscow had no intention of selling weapons to "troubled regions."

But Russia's RIA news agency last week quoted "confidential sources" as saying that Russia was fulfilling a S-300 contract with Iran.

The most advanced version of the S-300 system can track targets and fire at aircraft 120 km (75 miles) away. It is known in the West as the SA-20.

Russian arms sales and nuclear cooperation with Iran have strained relations with Washington, which says Tehran could use them against their interests in the region and also against its neighbors.

Russia, building Iran's first nuclear power plant in the southern port city of Bushehr, says Tehran does not have the capability to make nuclear weapons.

Kosari said the S-300 system would be used "to reinforce Iran's capability to defend its borders."

"The delivery of this system is a display of good relations between Iran and Russia, which cannot be harmed by Israel," IRNA quoted Kosari as saying.

[Armenian]

Re: The Rise of the Russian Empire: Russo-Armenian Relations

What has hurt the Russians most is the fact that they lost part of their Intercontinential Missile building facilities (they were in Ukraine). Their current arsenal of old SS-18, SS-19 etc. is ageing and being gradually retired from service as they reach their "expiry date". The new TOPOL missiles are not being built fast enough to replace them on one to one basis. So total numbers of missiles available is going to be less in the future. The lowest point will be reached sometime during the next decade. That is the window of opportunity that the US is seing. Enough ABM systems to neutralize most of a Russian counterstike....A nightmarish situation for the Russians where they can no longer deter the USA from launching a nuclear attack on Russia because their counterstrike will not be damaging enough.

Thank you, Zoravar. This is the kind of insider information and analysis I look for. Needless to say, I can't come across this kind of information in the western press. Therefore, I have trained myself to deduce such conclusions and analysis based on the various news reports, political rhetoric and political analysis I hear and read in the West. I feel as if I have become the master of reading between the lines...

Also, the Russians are not placing all their bets on ICBMs and SLBMs. Putin annouced early this year that they are restarting production of Tu-160 (Blackjack) strategic bombers. The rate is very slow (about one per year). With their cruise missiles, these should help maintain their strategic deterrent. In the air, the Russians have one thing in their favour: The START 1 treaty is about to expire. One of the closes of that treaty stipulated that the Russians (Soviets) remove inflight refueling probes from their smaller Tu-22M (Backfire) bombers. Once the treaty expires, they will be able to re-install the equipment and have these bombers available to give a hand to the larger bombers in strategic duties. One very clever move that the Russians did is to invest in the development of the KH-101 (conventional warhead) and KH-102 (nuclear warhead) stealth cruise missiles. They are at the final stages of testing and should enter service soon. With their 5000 km range these bomber carried weapons are practically immune to defenses. They are a good way to ensure that no one tries anything foolish against Russia. Again this program is very costly.

This is all very encouraging.

Russian submarines can launch their SLBMs from their territorial waters. Their 8000+ km range is enough to reach the USA. Unlike the earlier years of the cold war, the subs do not need to patrol close to US waters.

Yes, but they don't have much room to maneuver their vessels near their crowded and oft frozen waters, thus making them susceptible to NATO tracking. Furthermore, operating near US territorial waters in the vastness of the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans greatly reduces the trajectory flight time the SLBMs or the submarine launched cruise missiles need to reach their targets. Russian submarines near US waters also places Washington on the defensive, instead of their current offensive stance. Also, let's take into consideration the psyops (propaganda) value of Russian submarines near American waters...

Having said that, there are recent reports that the Russians are planning to convert their remaining 3 TYPHOON class SLBM carrying submarines into cruise missile carriers. These gigantic subs are now in storage because they are left without missiles (because the factory that produced their type of missiles is now in the Ukraine). The most likely model of the cruise missile is an expected naval version of the stealthy KH-101 and KH-102. That would be another clever investment that would further guarantee the strategic deterrent. In that case, these subs will have to patrol closer to the USA as the range of their weapons is only 5000km.

Again, thank you for clearing up a few things for me regarding this topic. One question: based on what you have been observing, how long do you think the window of opportunity of successfully carrying out an attack on the Russian Federation will last?

[KarotheGreat]

Re: The Rise of the Russian Empire: Russo-Armenian Relations

Russia May Build Long-Planned Nicaragua Canal

18 December 2008, Thursday

Click to enlarge the photo
Several routes have been proposed for a canal in Nicaragua that would compete with the Panama Canal. File photo
As relations between Moscow and Nicaragua are getting warmer, Russian media report that President Dmitry Medvedev is interested in the long-planed project for a Nicaraguan canal linking the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans.

The canal, plans for which exist since the early colonial era due to the favourable geography of the area, would compete with the Panama Canal and is supposed to carry bigger ships than the existing route.

Several possible routes have been proposed for a canal in Nicaragua, all making use of Lake Nicaragua, the second largest lake in Latin America.

If built, the Inter-Oceanic Nicaragua Canal would cut time and several hundred miles off the route from China to Europe or North America.

The idea for Russian participation in the project was reportedly discussed on Thursday as Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega began an official visit to Moscow, his first for 23 years, to discuss trade and economic issues as well as regional projects in Latin America with President Dmitry Medvedev.

Nicaragua was the second country, after Russia, to recognise last August the independence of South Ossetia and Abkhazia, the two pro-Russian breakaway provinces of the former Soviet republic of Georgia.

In September, Ortega received Russian Deputy Prime Minister Igor Sechin in Managua to discuss a Nicaragua-Russia economic cooperation programme, which was an end to the long-term virtual freeze in relations between the countries.

http://www.novinite.com/view_news.php?id=99941

[ZORAVAR]

Re: The Rise of the Russian Empire: Russo-Armenian Relations

One question: based on what you have been observing, how long do you think the window of opportunity of successfully carrying out an attack on the Russian Federation will last?

During the 90's Yeltsin was forced to "retreat" in front of the US and NATO. During the turmoil of these years and the disastrous conditions of the Russian economy, he was making concessions to the US administration and financially starving his nuclear arsenal. The only thing he was extracting from US/NATO was verbal promises of NATO not expanding eastwards, no ABM missiles in Europe etc.etc. Of course we know how trustworthy the American promises are!

Fast-forward to the new millenium and the rise of Putin and the re-invigoration of the Russian economy. Putin and his team saw the danger and slowly but surely raised the level of Russian military power, diplomacy, economy etc.. Basically, the title of this thread "The Rise of the Russian Empire" summerizes it all.

Frankly, I am not sure the US will have a "window of opportunity" at all. The economic crisis in America will force them to cut the 500 billion per year military budget. Even if they keep on funding programs like the ABM missiles etc, the Russians have now substantial technological and financial means to prevent that "window" happening. While the US was fighting (and financially bleeding) 2 wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Russians were taking the necessary steps....

The war in Georgia, the numerous long range sorties of Russian bombers, the long distance deployment and port visits of the Russian navy ships, the test firing of various new models of strategic missiles sends a clear and precise message to everybody.

By the way, the photos of the new upcoming ultra-capable stealth cruise missiles (posted above) became "available" to the press earlier this year...that was a message that I am sure many people will understand.