Kremlin Alarmed By US Missile Plan

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by tomahawk6, May 12, 2006.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. http://news.scotsman.com/latest.cfm?id=707832006&source=somnia

    Odd how the Russian's are more concerned with conventional warheads on ICBM's than with a nuclear armed Iran. While it is true that no one can tell whether an ICBM has a nuke warhead or not, the Russian's can tell whether such a launch is headed their way or not. If they can't figure it out I am sure they will be told prior to launch.
     
  2. Odd how Russia is alarmed at non-nukes in the first place. Oh no! a conventional warhead! Rather than taking out a city, it might take out a single building!!
     
  3. "Imagine a rocket that can be fired from a submarine. A nuclear state might not be able to react adequately to the firing of such a rocket. There is nothing written on it to say what sort of warhead it is -- whether it is conventional or nuclear," [Kremlin Chief of Staff Sergei] Sobyanin told reporters."
     
  4. Indeed. In fact, if one possessed even a modicum of common sense, one might pause for thought and ask themselves why the Russians weren't concerned.

    I can't understand why you'd want to. ICBMs are too innaccurate for conventional delivery. even the most accurate ICBM warhead- the W-87 from a LGM-188 Peacekeeper- has a reported CEP of around 90m. Hardly surgical, is it? They'd probably have to dream up some method of terminal guidance to make a conventional warhead useful. Even then, with the cost of the launch vehicle itself, it still seems rather like a 10 gallon solution to a 1 pint problem.

    Then you've got to figure out who you would want to use them against. Presumably, you'd be concerned about an integrated AD system that might give Tomahawk (much cheaper, more accurate, proven) a hard time. But then of course, you'd be thinking about China and North Korea etc. And what would their likely reaction be if they see an ICBM falling down on them?
     
  5. Option 1. US launches an ICBM with a 'conventional' warhead against Russia - don't ask why, it's hypothetical situation. Russia has no way of knowing that it's conventional (you accept that), so retaliates with nuclear ICBM(s) against US. US then does likewise. Earth turns to space dust.

    Option 2. Maybe, possibly, sometime in the distant future, Iran obtains the technology and the ability to construct an atomic device.

    Now, which is the more scary!!!!
     
  6. The Russians are worried as we got through the entire Cold War knowing that ICBM launch = nuclear war. If they saw one being launched it was no doubt coming their so they would flush the first wave of their missiles, launch the bombers and so on. The proposal by the US to use conventional warheads now means that they have to gamble on it being conventional and not a sneak first strike, or launch anyway and hope they don't start a nuclear war. It introduces a high degree of uncertainty into the equation, not something you want in the decision making process for a retaliatory mass nuclear strike.
     
  7. Why do the Americans feel they need to do this? Surely, as has been pointed out by crabtastic, as these weapons are inaccurate, a conventional warhead is really a bit of a waste on an ICBM. I think that the Americans are being rather short-sighted about all this, could ICBM's really be used against terrorists? NO! So... Why get them? Any answers?
     
  8. Beltway politics. US Navy Dept. is trying to justify a rather expensive upgrade/replacement of Ohio class submarines.
     
  9. :roll: Sounds about right! Thanks merkator.