NATO/US Military Build up in Eastern Europe-Russian borders

what I find funny is that nato and us troops, think that they are rolling their tanks over the russian border and into moscow to get the evil leader putin, they think russia is like iraq in the gulf war in 1991, they would be in shock at what they would face,

putinboss wrote:what I find funny is that nato and us troops, think that they are rolling their tanks over the russian border and into moscow to get the evil leader putin, they think russia is like iraq in the gulf war in 1991, they would be in shock at what they would face,

When are NATO and US troops rolling over the Russian border?

What sort of nightmares are you having?

You could just write the Map of 2nd wave Euromeatshield.

sepheronx wrote:Lawmaker: Moscow can answer possible deployment of US nuclear missiles in Europe

Americans are very stupid people it appears.  You cannot counter Russian nukes or missile systems this way.  They are far spread out and if they don't break INF, they cannot try to "counter them".  Even if it is an impossible task.

If the US decides to actually abandon INF and places missiles in Europe to so called counter Russia, then Russia could build systems that carries and fires multiple of cruise missiles in salvo, effectively making US anti missile systems incapable.  Cruise missiles are relatively cheap to make and thus it will be even easier to build them en mass.  They could also expand Iskander to reach much farther.  They could also increase number of land strike variants of cruise missiles with long range for Kilo submarines and surface ships.

Effectively, Russia has plenty of options.  They could also open up bases in Venezuela and other countries and place such missiles in those countries too.

I highly doubt that those missile shields in Euromeatshield are even believed to target russian missiles aiming at US. Since the entire NATO (US) logistics goes through Germany,France and UK for their military NATO projection for Europe, they will when a war gets hot or when tactical nukes are deployed, they will need to target those locations and since Tactical nuking is a very calculated game to destroy offensive or defensive capabilities of your enemy with least amount possible theatre/tactical nuke deplyoment, it is a rather calculated game of Downing such missiles. Tactical nukes are rather easy to intercept than Strategic ones.

Like discussed in another thread of Russia invading US (is it possible), i've already said, if the US tries to attack or NATO as a whole is trying to sustain a short or long term war against Russia, all that russia must do is tactically nuke NATO supply routes in Germany, that will bring the entire NATO war machinery to an almost instant hold. Those ABM shields are exactly for tactical nuking aka serious WW3 preperations.

sepheronx wrote:

Then more cruise missiles are needed as those ABM's cannot deal with Cruise missiles.  At the same time, more S-300V4's, S-400s and S-500's eventually to help protect Russia from NATO Missiles.  At same time, striking hard and lots at military instillations that would be protecting ABM sites would be needed, so missiles like cruise missiles would be enough, especially with modern high explosive warheads.  Hopefully systems much like Iskander but carrying more than 4 or 6 Klub missiles could be considered to strike the positions.  Having enough of them with the ability to work remotely, I would say would give Russia the benefit of being able to strike very hard.  Since they would be based within the country or Kaliningrad, they could effectively strike at any country in eastern Europe, that would be basing these ABM sites and missiles sites.  Poland for example.  In Crimea, they would be able to strike Romania quite easily.

As well, hopefully Russia goes for non nuclear based ICBM systems carrying special type of warheads of heavy high explosives to be able to build them, store them and use them much cheaper than nuclear.

Cruise missiles to hit ABM make little sense - US nuke salvo is already half way to Russia and you prey so at lease one club hits ABM?

I strongly believe that multi warhead IRBM/MRBM/SRBM flying on non ballistic trajectory with maneuvering warheads is bet option. Fast delivery (iskander 8-9 Ma vs 0,9 Ma Klub) makes it weapon of choice.

And yes Russia must watch also budget but I am pretty sure that Rubezh is modular and Iskander had in construction phase option to grow on steroids

The crucial point here is really that Russia is so lazy and so careful or maybe hesitating with reactions. It is bound to have a limited amount of Cruise Missiles, IRBM's and Tactical Nukes. This limitation makes the entire situation and plan or lets call it for what it is Operation Unthinkable, a numbers game. Lets be very generous to NATO's ABM and Anti-Aircraft capabilities. Let us awesome the US has made its preperations since years and have build up entire ABM shield in sufficient numbers (sufficient numbers i will come to that), let us be another time generous of the capability of those SAM's and ABM shields against IRBM and Cruise Missiles is good enough to be almost immune to older generations without advanced ECM and flight trajectory changing to avoid interception. MEaning...they have planned the attack for decades, all their Meatshields are on alert and ready, the US initiates its proxy move and at some point, unlikely to be early from the start of the hot war, russia will have to respond, it will fight for quite some time this proxy war (ukraine) is first wave and 2nd wave will be poles looking at their political sphere and russian hatred, so after some years of slow depleting proxy war, Russia with an unknown leader will have enough of this shit and do what they would do in such situation, trying to overcome ABM shields in europe and trying to destroy key points of logistics which are concentrated almost only in Germany. Germany strategically is absolutley crucial and important for both sides, Projection over Europe of west and east goes always through Germany it was like that during 18th century it is the same case in 20th and 21ct century. So losing entire germany for russia is not an option. They will rely on strategy of defeating ABM shields and logistical key points in Europe and essentially germany.

Some numbers before here have been posted of the IRBM and ICBM's in russian inventory, for this kind of operation we can only suggest IRBM's and Cruise Missiles. Right now there is only one type of IRBM useful to overcome ABM and SAM without first dealing with ABM/SAM itself that would be Iskander-M which can change its flight trajectory, the rest of the current in active service missiles have no such feature, so giving the american Euromeatshield generoustiy to defeat any other type of missile would leave Russia with less then 100 IRBM's for this job. Statistically speaking this ABM shields can indeed cripple russia to such an extent it would need to rely on ICBM use in Europe against countries which are not possible to lose for short nor long term future. Nuking military assets is one thing, using Strategic weapons there were designed to be used against US is a total different thing, that will only bring more russophobia to europe and it would defeat its own future with Germany, since the greatest threat to the US is not China and Russia united but Germany and Russia united. The projection of political and economical power of these so called 1st World is Germany, call it indoctrination, call it self-evident century old perception whatever, that are the circumstances.

I guess it was franco who has posted a short list of Russias inventory of ICBM's, IRBM's /SSBM's and Cruise Missiles and the numbers of advanced BM's is very short, short enough to deal even with a backwarded ABM and SAM sytems like the Americans.

If franco could provide again the numbers, we could see it even clearer what i mean. One of those numbers was just as 88 high of advanced Ballistic Missiles. So if this circumstances and reluctant reaction of russia stays the same with the same low numberes of advanced IRBM's,ICBM's, SSBM's and Cruise Missiles then it will end in a totalitarian war and exchange of ICBM's or a decade long war with only one benefiter, once again...

There will be no winner in 3rd world war except cockroaches I am afraid. But there is also good news. As long as MAD is in place no major war can take place. In case of total war bombing Germany or other countries do not matter. That´s why US wants to scale down Russia´s nuclear arsenal and use combination PGS/ABM and possibly bio-warfare (guess why Russia has put so much effort in Ebola vaccine?) to disarm Russia. The only way I can see in military dimension is to build up nuclear deterrent.

- large numbers of relatively cheap, nuclear capable missiles flying at non ballistic trajectories with maneuvering warheads (say either Iskander on steroids 1000-1500km Romania and Poland till Germany in reach) or modular system like Rubezh with scaled down range (till Cabo de Roca) and as many as to making EU part of MAD.

- build up hypersonic missiles with if not global then continental reach (EU ABM and US fleet with ABM)

- return to FOBS concept with Sarmat instead of Voevoda
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fractional_Orbital_Bombardment_System

- increase investments into info warfare (RT on steroids suporting local civil rights and ethic divisions in West:)

- invest in Sarmats to ensure erasing US from map just in case

About Russofobia I would not care so much, as hate propaganda is controlled by corpo news form one place. Then EU citizens would still have little chance to vote for different govts... to avoid Armageddon. Besides ere RT is best weapon.

I am not sure if before financial collapse of US all this can be implemented. Surging wave of hatery in US led media is best proof that collapse is closer and closer

http://www.usdebtclock.org

officially 61 trillion USD. They cannot and will not pay back. EU is not worse really . Money after looting Eastern Europe run out...that´s why IMHO Uncle Pu is spending so heavily on rearmament programme. the only thing that keeps bandits at bay.

As for Germany, with all my sympathy to Germans they are no match to power of Asia. Germans under US occupation 70 yrs ar on suicide course where Germans are being replaced by non-integrable immigrants who seem hate local culture and traditions. Besides Germany is way to small market to live only form Russia an German but China itself is enough not to mention India/Iran or Latin America. west in not really needed in this equation.

China is partner not to be replaced for foreseeable future ideally when Iran and India join the club.

sepheronx wrote:

GunshipDemocracy wrote:

sepheronx wrote:

Then more cruise missiles are needed as those ABM's cannot deal with Cruise missiles.  At the same time, more S-300V4's, S-400s and S-500's eventually to help protect Russia from NATO Missiles.  At same time, striking hard and lots at military instillations that would be protecting ABM sites would be needed, so missiles like cruise missiles would be enough, especially with modern high explosive warheads.  Hopefully systems much like Iskander but carrying more than 4 or 6 Klub missiles could be considered to strike the positions.  Having enough of them with the ability to work remotely, I would say would give Russia the benefit of being able to strike very hard.  Since they would be based within the country or Kaliningrad, they could effectively strike at any country in eastern Europe, that would be basing these ABM sites and missiles sites.  Poland for example.  In Crimea, they would be able to strike Romania quite easily.

As well, hopefully Russia goes for non nuclear based ICBM systems carrying special type of warheads of heavy high explosives to be able to build them, store them and use them much cheaper than nuclear.

Cruise missiles to hit ABM make little sense - US nuke salvo is already half way to Russia and you prey so at lease one club hits ABM?

I strongly believe that multi warhead IRBM/MRBM/SRBM flying on non ballistic trajectory with maneuvering warheads is bet option. Fast delivery (iskander 8-9 Ma vs  0,9 Ma Klub)  makes it weapon of choice.

And yes Russia must watch also budget but I am pretty sure that Rubezh is modular and Iskander had in construction phase option to grow on steroids

Gunship

ABM's cannot counter cruise missiles or at least not effectively as ABM systems fly at a very high altitude but not low altitude.  Cruise missiles fly at a low altitude.  They are cheap too, and would be able to build enough in shorter time period than a BM.  That is why Russia is investing in new anti radiation cruise missiles.  Kh-58 I believe is the model.

US ABM system isn't going to be deployed in large numbers, and even if they do, it wont be effective anyway.  Especially if the BM in Russia are located far away anyway.  Iskanders is ideal but they lack the range at the moment.  And if in case the INF treaty does go bunk, they will most likely invest far more money in Iskanders and advancing them with much longer ranges.

ICBM's are Russias main deterrent.  And if Russia gets a glimps that US launches their BM (Which they will detect as soon as they are launched) they will launch theirs and no ABM system will protect them 100%.  So yeah.

Cruise missiles are actually a major threat to most countries and only few have abilities to counter them, Russia being one of them.  So yeah.  And that is the other thing, the US will have their (which will be Tomohawks of course), and Pantsir's and Tor's will be stationed to deal with them.  They may not be able to deal with a swarm of it, but that goes for US systems as well.

Let us also add, they can overwhelm the systems at time they launch their ICBM's as well.

It should also be noted (and GarryB can back me up on this) that Russian manpad's such as Igla-S, and soon to be unveiled June 15-16 at 'Army-2015', the next gen manpad 'Verba', are capable of destroying low flying cruise missiles (like the ones the US will redeploy to Europe), and that Russia also developed (I posted Rostec articles on this development) low-horizon radars (such as 'Outpost') that have signal processing that are capable of tracking 50 low-flying targets at a time, at 20 km distance, and only needs a minimum of 30 centimeters to differentiate between two low flying targets, that are likely capable of being integrated in to manpad teams:

https://www.russiadefence.net/t2547p210-russian-radar-systems#69712

1) what all low flying cruise missile usa posses except tomahawk ?
 

2) If usa is deploying them in europe then why cant ruussia deploy it in cuba ? lacking balls perhaps .

3) Does US posses igla , verba like manpad ? can you compare the efficiency of both rus and usa manpads .

max steel wrote:2) If usa is deploying them in europe then why cant ruussia deploy it in cuba ? lacking balls perhaps .

Well, there is something called the "host country". Contrary to what some people think, Russia can't just place nuclear weapons in this country or a Tu-22M3 regiment in that country unilaterally. They need to get consent first. And that will not be easily had. Do Cuba even want to host nuclear weapons when they are working on developing better relations with the US? Not to mention Russias pretty strongly expressed demand that nuclear weapons should only be deployed in their own countries.

"Lack of balls" has little to do with it. Too much balls and you risk having them cut off and stuffed in your mouth...

Cucumber Khan wrote:

Well, there is something called the "host country". Contrary to what some people think, Russia can't just place nuclear weapons in this country or a Tu-22M3 regiment in that country unilaterally. They need to get consent first. And that will not be easily had. Do Cuba even want to host nuclear weapons when they are working on developing better relations with the US? Not to mention Russias pretty strongly expressed demand that nuclear weapons should only be deployed in their own countries.

US, Cuba Will Take a Long Time to Normalize Ties . Not until THEY return G'bay . If US deploys missile in Europe ( because europe is a prey and usa is host ) russia has right to retaliate and it can place missiles in cuba with cuban govt consent only . They didn't park nukes in cuba unilaterally in 1960s , it was done after taking their consent .

max steel wrote:
US, Cuba Will Take a Long Time to Normalize Ties . Not until THEY return G'bay . If US deploys missile in Europe ( because europe is a prey and usa is host ) russia has right to retaliate and it can place missiles in cuba with cuban govt consent only . They didn't park nukes in cuba unilaterally in 1960s , it was  done after taking their consent .

So far Nicaragua agreed to hosts Russian military and Chinese canal a bit longer distance than Cuba (to Florida in virtually no time for Clubs or Iskanders)