CHUD.com Community › Forums › POLITICS & RELIGION › Political Discourse › " So my country is in financial ruin up yours! "Russia Developing New Nuclear Missile
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

" So my country is in financial ruin up yours! "Russia Developing New Nuclear Missile

post #1 of 85
Thread Starter 
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20041117/D86DLRLG0.html

MOSCOW (AP) - President Vladimir Putin said Wednesday that Russia is developing a new form of nuclear missile unlike those held by other countries, news agencies reported.

Speaking at a meeting of the Armed Forces' leadership, Putin reportedly said that Russia is researching and successfully testing new nuclear missile systems.

"I am sure that ... they will be put in service within the next few years and, what is more, they will be developments of the kind that other nuclear powers do not and will not have," Putin was quoted as saying by the ITAR-Tass news agency.

Putin reportedly said: "International terrorism is one of the major threats for Russia. We understand as soon as we ignore such components of our defense as a nuclear and missile shield, other threats may occur."

No details were immediately available, but Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov said earlier this month that Russia expected to test-fire a mobile version of its Topol-M ballistic missile this year and that production of the new weapon could be commissioned in 2005.

News reports have also said Russia is believed to be developing a next-generation heavy nuclear missile that could carry up to 10 nuclear warheads weighing a total of 4.4 tons, compared with the Topol-M's 1.32-ton combat payload.

Topol-Ms have been deployed in silos since 1998. The missiles have a range of about 6,000 miles and reportedly can maneuver in ways that are difficult to detect.

Earlier this year, a senior Defense Ministry official was quoted as telling news agencies that Russia had developed a weapon that could make the United States' proposed missile-defense system useless. Details were not given, but military analysts said the claimed new weapon could be a hypersonic cruise missile or maneuverable ballistic missile warheads.
----
White House Reacts With Caution to Russia

2 hours, 27 minutes ago

WASHINGTON - The White House reacted cautiously Wednesday to Russian President Vladimir Putin (news - web sites)'s statement that his country is developing a nuclear missile "of the kind that other nuclear powers do not and will not have."


White House press secretary Scott McClellan said it wasn't news to the Bush administration, that President Bush (news - web sites) and Putin had discussed the issue previously. He emphasized U.S.-Russia agreements in place to reduce the two countries' nuclear arsenals and Washington's view of Moscow as a crucial partner in the anti-terror battle.

"This is not something that we look at as new," he said. "We are very well aware of their long-standing modernization efforts for their military. ... We are allies now in the global war on terrorism."

McClellan suggested that close ties between Bush and Putin makes alarm unnecessary ? but doesn't eliminate Washington's concern.

"We have a very different relationship than we did in the Cold War," he said. "The fact that we do have a good relationship enables us to speak very directly to our Russian friends."

Putin said earlier Wednesday that Russia is researching and successfully testing new nuclear missile systems, the ITAR-Tass news agency reported.

"I am sure that ... they will be put in service within the next few years and, what is more, they will be developments of the kind that other nuclear powers do not and will not have," Putin was quoted as saying.
post #2 of 85
Oh, FUCK!


This is exactly what the world does not need right now.
post #3 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by Van Jones
Oh, FUCK!


This is exactly what the world does not need right now.
What's to say the we already don't have something better than this?
post #4 of 85
No, according to the president, this is just fine. Bush wants to Putinize America too.

And by the way, we are developing our own set of new mini nukes, you know, the kind that can be detonated in populated areas like Tehran, eastern Afghanistan, and Pyongyang.
post #5 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by billylove
What's to say the we already don't have something better than this?
What's to say that matters? Only ONE hit is needed from either side when it comes to nuclear weapons, regardless of who has the "better" arsenal.
post #6 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by billylove
What's to say the we already don't have something better than this?
That's not the point, the point is that re-starting a nuclear arms race right now is like barrelling past another signpost on the road to hell.
post #7 of 85
Quote:
He emphasized U.S.-Russia agreements in place to reduce the two countries' nuclear arsenals
Isn't that agreement the nuclear non-proliferation treaty that Bush broke to develop his new bunker busters?
post #8 of 85
Yeah, I think so.
post #9 of 85
I think we've been here before (sadly).
post #10 of 85
And yet there's heavy criticizing about Iran's nuclear developments - but hey, don't worry about Russia. They're a DEMOCRACY now.

[/insert sarcasm]
post #11 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by Copperlocke3
What's the name of the oil co. the Russian Gov't is fixing to purchase for 3.5 million?
I can't recall. Anyone?
Yukos OAO. Putin has run their biggest company into the ground with (what I feel are) trumped up charges.
post #12 of 85
Sad isn't it, for a while it seemed we came a long way form almost killing humanity with nukes during the cold war. Now the US is building bombs that will use and Russia wants even bigger bombs. Guess MAD no longer works.
post #13 of 85
I think the world is just too stupid for M.A.D to work anymore.
post #14 of 85
*edit - wrong post*
post #15 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by marc
Isn't that agreement the nuclear non-proliferation treaty that Bush broke to develop his new bunker busters?
It's worthing pointing out that much of the justification for nuclear bunker busters stemmed from intelligence information about this, which subsequently (and rather embarressingly) turned out to be this:

post #16 of 85
My first reaction was to make an obligatory Segway joke.

However, reading about stealth nuclear missiles scared the shit out of me.
post #17 of 85
Thread Starter 
*chuckles* Don't worry Mast you're not the only one.
post #18 of 85
All I can do to keep my sanity is joke:

If Red Alert 2 happens, I'm going to become a chronotrooper.
post #19 of 85
Come on guys, he's just advertising for the new Metal Gear! Stealth nuclear missiles are straight out of the first MGS.
post #20 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by sorro
Yukos OAO. Putin has run their biggest company into the ground with (what I feel are) trumped up charges.
He also silences media opposition, doesn't mind sending in the troops to slaughter his own people and makes a mockery of the democratic process.

He does support our war in Iraq, though, so we keep supporting him.
post #21 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by Key Chung
No, according to the president, this is just fine. Bush wants to Putinize America too.

And by the way, we are developing our own set of new mini nukes, you know, the kind that can be detonated in populated areas like Tehran, eastern Afghanistan, and Pyongyang.
alright cool...sounds good...
post #22 of 85
Seriously, I'd jump on the Chrono tech anyday!

...or...maybe I'd go for a British sniper in the IFV...that'd be good times...especially if there are about 5 of us and we're all fully promoted...hell yeah...can't really touch that
post #23 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by ALIENinfluence
It can actually be worse than stealth nuke missiles. One of the reasons that the military has been heavily funding scientific research into making artificial miniature black holes under labratory conditions is in order to go to the 'next step' after nuclear weaponry. Black hole weaponry. If succussful, a black hole-creating missile is 'thought' to be able to hit a target, presumably a city or large base, then use the black hole's effect to pull in the mass surrounding the target area, using the imploding characteristics of a gravitational singularity as opposed to the explosive destruction caused by nuclear fission. So, even if you hid in the best bunker money could buy, you would still be compelled to visit the center of the black hole, bunker or no bunker.

Possibly ruin the time-space continuum on the face of the planet? Continuum-smontinuum! As Rush Limbaugh has said, this planet can take anything we can dish out to it! Whee! Maybe we'll all get sucked up into hell like on Event Horizon! In that version of hell, Director Paul Anderson is Satan and he wears Maximillian the robot-shaped armor. No, this is not a joke about this idea of weaponry.
Mate, don't take this the wrong way but ... I think you've been reading too many [bad] SF novels. <grin>
post #24 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by ALIENinfluence
It can actually be worse than stealth nuke missiles. One of the reasons that the military has been heavily funding scientific research into making artificial miniature black holes under labratory conditions is in order to go to the 'next step' after nuclear weaponry. Black hole weaponry. If succussful, a black hole-creating missile is 'thought' to be able to hit a target, presumably a city or large base, then use the black hole's effect to pull in the mass surrounding the target area, using the imploding characteristics of a gravitational singularity as opposed to the explosive destruction caused by nuclear fission. So, even if you hid in the best bunker money could buy, you would still be compelled to visit the center of the black hole, bunker or no bunker.
No. No! I refuse to believe it. Human beings can't possibly be that stupid. No way.
post #25 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by ALIENinfluence
Oh, I'm not offended at all, it does sound absolutely crazy. But it's being tried nonetheless. If a thing like a black hole weapon could really be made, do you doubt for a millisecond that the current military-extremist US administration would make it? Would they would hesitate to get one up on the Russians?

The Cold War is not really over at all. During the latter days of the Manhattan Project, some of the scientists involved believed that exploding a nuclear device could possibly cause a chain reaction in the atmosphere and burn off all of the planet's oxygen, because at that time it was not known how to 'stop' a nuclear explosion and control it's effects once started. Other scientists involved said that was a chance we had to take to stop Japan and Germany. We chose to risk taking out everybody in order to kill off a small percentage of the populous. If you had heard of this argument going on within the Manhattan Project in the 1940's would that have sounded like a bad SF novel?
Despite being predicted by general relativity and other gravitational theories the existence of Black Holes still remains to be proved. Granted the evidence does seem to point to their presence (and influence) in the universe, but the fact that we don’t understand enough of their nature to prove their existence is an important point. If we cannot state with absolute certainty that they are with us then the chances of designing (even theoretically) a “singularity weapon” can only be regarded as very slim.

Moving on to problem area number two: the theory goes that to collapse the kind of mass required to create the smallest possible Black Hole one would require at least three solar masses or 1.9891 × 10(33) (just short of one million earths). I don’t think I need to point out that there is a rather BIG problem to overcome here.

Thirdly, even if it were possible to pack such mass into a delivery mechanism, there is no evidence to suggest that Black Holes can: a) be controlled and b) shut down. Create a singularity and it would not only spaghettify Moscow into an atom stream but the rest of the planet too.

Finally, Black Holes are super massive sources of Gamma rays. Gamma rays and human physiology don’t mix. In other words – whoever launches the weapon dies too.

I’m sorry but this story is rubbish peddled by someone with an overactive imagination and no head for basic science. If you are looking for SF that is in the least bit plausible then do a google search for Orbital Kinetic Weapons. At least they are possible, if somewhat expensive.
post #26 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by ALIENinfluence
No, you're not sorry, and your more than a little arrogant to boot.
As a part-time PHD student it’s my role in life to be dismissive of unsubstantiated nonsense.

Quote:
No one said this possible future weapon was in existence already, I merely said that there was research being funded into getting one made. If you believe that black holes cannot be created artificially, maybe you should send a letter to the Swiss (see the link). I guess when they turn on this particle collider they really plan on committing suicide instead of creating a black hole. Similar projects are being planned in the US as well.
http://static.highbeam.com/m/mercury...fthedecadephy/
The Large Hadron Collider (based in Switzerland – which is something of a giveaway) has not been designed to create mini Black Holes or conduct weapons research.

The CERN particle accelerator has been built to investigate the nature and origin of mass, neutrinos and their role in the universe, the presence of dark matter (an extremely important question for physicists) and whether or not matter is a mirror-image of anti-matter.

Fanciful (and ludicrously volatile) theoretical SF weapons are, as far as I can deduce, not on the agenda for reasons that should be self-evident.
post #27 of 85
Quote:
Earlier this year, a senior Defense Ministry official was quoted as telling news agencies that Russia had developed a weapon that could make the United States' proposed missile-defense system useless. Details were not given, but military analysts said the claimed new weapon could be a hypersonic cruise missile or maneuverable ballistic missile warheads.
What? You mean the U.S.'s billion dollar boondoggle looks to trigger another arms race? Well, I am shocked! Who would have guessed that would happen? This certainly came out of left field, let me tell you.
post #28 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by ALIENinfluence
Your education doesn't excuse you from being incorrect on an issue. You seemed to claim in your previous posts that due to the (obviously) hazardous effects and the energy involved in creating a black hole, no one should even try because it can't be done. Apparently, scientists of the scientifically advanced nations are in disagreement with you. I didn't read the idea of a black hole weapon from a comic book, I heard about it from my deceased father-in-law, a career Navy weapon expert and an engineer in the Defense Contracting field (FMC) who was one of the primary designers of the Vertical Launching System (no one was ever supposed to be able to launch missiles from a ship either, because that would have defied physics as well, but it was done anyway), along with several other Naval shipboard weapons systems.

In the talks we had before his death, he often spoke of the projects that he had been a part of before he contracted cancer. Weapons were his bread and butter. The US Defense department has been drooling over the idea of a black hole weapon since the late 1980's and even if you don't believe one can ever be created, experiments to do just that are ongoing and are being funded heavily. As to their success, who's to say? As for the reason, I've already stated it, they want to get around the enemy hiding in a bunker that can withstand a nuclear hit on the surface or in an air burst.

The article stated that the CERN is one of the acknowledged ongoing projects to try and create an artificial black hole, even if that is not the collider's supposed primary function. The US counterparts to that field of research most likely would take place at Livermore, Brookhaven, or some similar place where massive colliders are already being built or are under construction. If you are of the mindset that believes mankind plans on stopping it's desire for destruction at thermonuclear devices, you have a lot more faith in man than I do.
There really is no point continuing this "debate" with you. Feel free to luxuriate in your own fanicful "mindset". I have neither the time, willingness nor the energy to dissuade you from your woolgathering.
post #29 of 85
Are you kidding me? No one is trying to synthesize a black fucking hole! Either you're joking or you're a fucking moron in desparate need of a physics lesson.
post #30 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by ALIENinfluence
And you feel free to stick your head in the sand and think nice, warm thoughts. For some reason, I have the idea that your Phd is from a cow college and that your degree is not a scientific one.
I trust you'll extract yourself from your comic book long enough to give me advance warning of an impending singularity weapon detonation?

<fx: snigger>
post #31 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by ALIENinfluence
Juddl, you can go fuck yourself.
Charming!
post #32 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by ALIENinfluence
Juddl, you can go fuck yourself.
I can also sit here content in the knowledge that you are retarded.
post #33 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by ALIENinfluence
Yeah, I'm retarded enough to know that with the 2 incomplete systems of General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics, that Physics is still an incomplete science. You and your buddy from Cow College U both are on your high horses claiming to absolutely know all there is to know about black holes and their related effects. I'm eagerly awaiting the next paper you two are going to publish in the Scientific American.
Bwahahahahahahah!
post #34 of 85
ok so, the most brilliant minds in the world are still trying to figure out just what a black hole is and what it does to matter and you think someone knows enough to try and create one? Let alone control it?

You know a black hole is just a collapsed star right? There's just a certain mass where above that threshhold burnt out star can no longer support its own mass and then it collapses into itself creating a black hole, if it is under that mass then it becomes a neutron star... or it explodes into a super novae... so how are we doing this again?
post #35 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by ALIENinfluence
If you want to get in on the fun, at least take the time to read the link I posted awhile back. Argue with the Swiss, not me. I'm not working on the project.
What you are talking about is small masses packed into extremely small sizes in order to study the nature of singularity, not to harness into a weapon.
post #36 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by ALIENinfluence
If you want to get in on the fun, at least take the time to read the link I posted awhile back. Argue with the Swiss, not me. I'm not working on the project.
The Swiss aren't attempting to create a Black Hole.
post #37 of 85
I wouldn't be surprised if some defense-industry twit thought funding a black-hole weapon would be a grand idea. Moreover, I can see research scientists taking the money; recieving large amounts of money for big physics experiments is a lot more appealing than explaining to bureaucrats why their dreamy sci-fi weapon is physically implausible. After all, the defense industry has been hoodwinked by fall manner of senseless "scientific" proposals.
post #38 of 85
Not that I'm suggesting the brains at a phenomenal waste of money like CERN are attempting to create a some general's comic-book weapon fantasy.
post #39 of 85
Just pre-empting the most obvious retort on the part of JuddL or AO.
post #40 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by ALIENinfluence
What? Are we not reading the same link? What does the headline of the article from the link state?
From a CERN resource:

Quote:

Questions to be answered:


* What is mass? (We know how to measure it - but what is it?)

* What's the origin of mass of particles? (In particular, does the Higgs Boson exist?)

* Why do elementary particles have different masses? (I.e., do particles interact with a Higgs field?)

* Are neutrinos really massless?

* We know that 95% of the universe's mass is not made of matter as we know it. What is it? (I.e. what is dark matter, dark energy?)

* Do supersymmetric (SUSY) particles exist?

* Is antimatter a perfect reflection of matter?

* Are there extra dimensions, as predicted by various models inspired by string theory, and can we "see" them?
Nope, no mention of mini Black Holes here.
post #41 of 85
So let's get things straight. It is potentially possible to synthesize a black hole by condensing any amount of mass into a sufficiently small space, we could potentially achieve this but not to the end you're talking about.
post #42 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by ALIENinfluence
I'LL SHOUT SO THAT MAYBE YOU CAN UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION! WHAT DOES THE HEADLINE OF THE LINKED ARTICLE STATE? DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE WORDS THAT ARE COMIN' OUTTA MY MOUTH?
Robert Naeye doesn't work for and isn't involved with the CERN project, moron.
post #43 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by ALIENinfluence
You can't even answer a simple question and I'm the moron? You need to look to Adam Warren's example of what I wrote. Apparently your lessons at the dubiously esteemed Cow College U are going to waste!
<fx: snigger>

Go back your SF novels, fool. Next you'll be attempting to put the frighteners on us with ludicrously unsubstantiated claims about Bush constructing a Death Star.

<fx: laughter>
post #44 of 85
Orange:

Yourself and Judd are seriously misreading this guy's posts. You're insulting him for claims he has not made. (Yet you act offended when he resorts to your tactics.) Granted, Alien's posts are not the picture of clarity, but he has not stated that he believes any of the things that you accuse him of.
post #45 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by AgentOrange
Robert Naeye doesn't work for and isn't involved with the CERN project, moron.
Neither do you.
post #46 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam Warren
Orange:

Yourself and Judd are seriously misreading this guy's posts. You're insulting him for claims he has not made. (Yet you act offended when he resorts to your tactics.) Granted, Alien's posts are not the picture of clarity, but he has not stated that he believes any of the things that you accuse him of.
When Alien can back up the following statement with some semblance of coherency I'll listen:

Quote:
One of the reasons that the military has been heavily funding scientific research into making artificial miniature black holes under labratory conditions is in order to go to the 'next step' after nuclear weaponry. Black hole weaponry. If succussful, a black hole-creating missile is 'thought' to be able to hit a target, presumably a city or large base, then use the black hole's effect to pull in the mass surrounding the target area, using the imploding characteristics of a gravitational singularity as opposed to the explosive destruction caused by nuclear fission
To be frank, I'm suprised you are backing up the fool.
post #47 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by AgentOrange
<fx: snigger>

Go back your SF novels, fool. Next you'll be attempting to put the frighteners on us with ludicrously unsubstantiated claims about Bush constructing a Death Star.

<fx: laughter>
You post this, yet you feign insult when he tells you to fuck off?

In your rush to paint ALIEN as a lame-brained fanboy, you've neglected to read his posts properly. If your going to be a condescending prick, at least be good at it.
post #48 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by ALIENinfluence
Yep, if we ever could artificially create a mini-black hole, which we all agree is a very destructive force, the Department of Defense would not look in that direction at all. You sure are good at reading human nature.
Dude, it has nothing to do with human nature it is simply impractical. The fact is, the "black holes" which these scientists are seeking to create do not have the mass absorbing force of a cosmic black hole. They are not the same thing, though they are similar in that they both represent singularity.
post #49 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam Warren
Neither do you.
And I'm somehow discredited by pointing out the fact that Naeye isn't qualified to pass judgment on experimental research he is excluded from?
post #50 of 85
Quote:
Originally Posted by AgentOrange
To be frank, I'm suprised you are backing up the fool.
When you act like a condescending prick, you're pissing in my territory.

I'd suggest not being so literal in your interpretations of ALIENinfluence's posts. Yes, his claim is ambiguous, but there's a fairly sensible post inbetween the wacky claims. All the guy was trying to say is that it wouldn't be surprising if the military Was funding a loony "Black Whole" weapons programme.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Political Discourse
CHUD.com Community › Forums › POLITICS & RELIGION › Political Discourse › " So my country is in financial ruin up yours! "Russia Developing New Nuclear Missile