# GENERAL FORUM > IN THE NEWS >  "Putin vows 'arms race' response"

## Prada

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7234817.stm

Russia's President Vladimir Putin says the world is engaged in a new arms race and Nato is failing to accommodate Russia's concerns.

In a nationally-televised speech, he condemned Nato's expansion and the US plan to include Poland and the Czech Republic in a missile defence shield.

"It is already clear that a new phase in the arms race is unfolding in the world," Mr Putin said.

"It is not our fault, because we did not start it," he said.

Mr Putin was speaking less than a month before Russians elect his successor.

In his speech, to the State Council - Russia's top politicians, officials and generals - he said other countries were spending far more than Russia on new weapons.

But Russia would always respond to the challenges of a new arms race by developing more hi-tech weaponry, he said.

Military muscle

Referring to Nato's activities in Central and Eastern Europe, Mr Putin said "there are many discussions on these, but... we have still not seen any real steps towards finding a compromise".

"In effect, we are forced to retaliate, to take corresponding decisions. Russia has, and always will have, responses to these new challenges," he said. 

In December, Russia said it was planning naval exercises in the Mediterranean Sea and the Atlantic Ocean.

It has also resumed long-range patrols by its bomber aircraft.

The practice was suspended after the collapse of the Soviet Union and was revived last August, as part of a more assertive foreign policy pursued by President Putin.

Higher oil prices have enabled Russia to re-invest in its armed forces, but its military capabilities remain far below what they were during the Soviet era.

The BBC's World Affairs correspondent Nick Childs says Mr Putin's language will add to growing worries in the West about Russia's new assertiveness.

Our correspondent says there was a time when Moscow appeared weakened, short of money, preoccupied with domestic problems, and relatively passive in terms of foreign policy.

But he says it is clear that Mr Putin is sending a none-too-subtle message that Russia is back on the international stage.

----------


## Flagg

I don't know who is going to supercede Putin or what his replacement will be like, but i'm glad he's going. He's doing/done his best to alienate Russia from The West.

----------


## Kärnfysikern

The west isnt realy inocent in this. NATO is doing just as much to alienate russia.

----------


## soulstealer

> I don't know who is going to supercede Putin or what his replacement will be like, but i'm glad he's going. He's doing/done his best to alienate Russia from The West.


Putin isnt actually going.... he'll still be pulling the strings...

----------


## Lexed

> Putin isnt actually going.... he'll still be pulling the strings...


yep..

----------


## thegodfather

I find it quite hypocritical that we're sitting here talking about him alienating Russia when in reality all he is trying to do is provide a strong national defense for his country. Russia pales in comparison to the United States as far as flexing it's military power and being rather Imperialistic.

----------


## soulstealer

> I find it quite hypocritical that we're sitting here talking about him alienating Russia when in reality all he is trying to do is provide a strong national defense for his country. Russia pales in comparison to the United States as far as flexing it's military power and being rather Imperialistic.


I agree to an extent Our politicians act like we are god like any the only one who has any right to military power.... When infact a truly democratic state would acknowledge that every sovereign entity has a right to defend it self...

----------


## Flagg

He once stated he was the worlds last Democrat.

----------


## Prada

> I don't know who is going to supercede Putin or what his replacement will be like, but i'm glad he's going. He's doing/done his best to alienate Russia from The West.


Not really, Dmitry Medvedev has openly stated that he would like to have Putin as his PM, if elected. That is if Medvedev wins the elections which he will.




> I find it quite hypocritical that we're sitting here talking about him alienating Russia when in reality all he is trying to do is provide a strong national defense for his country. Russia pales in comparison to the United States as far as flexing it's military power and being rather Imperialistic.


Agreed, I think it has every right to do what it is doing, knowing its power in recent history. Economically speaking they can commence allocating more money into military and operation as in the flying long range bombers. Something that hasnt been done in decades.
http://www.nctimes.com/articles/2007..._298_17_07.txt




> He once stated he was the worlds last Democrat.


Really? I didnt read that one, based on what grounds does he argue that? Id like to read into that if you have it.
He once stated he was the worlds last Democrat.

----------


## gixxerboy1

> I find it quite hypocritical that we're sitting here talking about him alienating Russia when in reality all he is trying to do is provide a strong national defense for his country. Russia pales in comparison to the United States as far as flexing it's military power and being rather Imperialistic.


I agree. Russia isnt doing anything we dont. 

Putin isnt gonig anyplace. He will be Pm and still run the show

----------


## Kärnfysikern

> Really? I didnt read that one, based on what grounds does he argue that? Id like to read into that if you have it.
> He once stated he was the worlds last Democrat.


I'm the world's only true democrat, says Putin
http://www.reuters.com/article/world...4?feedType=RSS



> MOSCOW (Reuters) - Russia's President Vladimir Putin has described himself as the world's only "pure" democrat and attacked the United States and Europe, which have criticized him, for falling short of their own ideals.
> 
> In an interview with Western media released on Monday, he rejected Western criticism that he has centralized power in the Kremlin, marginalized the opposition and increased state control over the media.
> 
> Asked whether he agreed with former German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder's description of him as an "impeccable democrat", Putin replied lau***ng:
> 
> "Of course I am an absolute, pure democrat. But you know the problem? It's not even a problem, it's a real tragedy. The thing is that I am the only one, there just aren't any others in the world."
> 
> Putin said the West's record on democracy was less than perfect.
> ...

----------


## Prada

> I'm the world's only true democrat, says Putin
> http://www.reuters.com/article/world...4?feedType=RSS


Thanks.

I hope he is being facetious. Boy the guys got a bigger nutsac then your raccoon J.

----------


## Kratos

They should just build that weapon they had in the movie Dr. Strangelove.

"Of course, the whole point of a Doomsday Machine is lost, if you *keep* it a *secret*! Why didn't you tell the world, EH?"

----------


## Kärnfysikern

> Thanks.
> 
> I hope he is being facetious. Boy the guys got a bigger nutsac then your raccoon J.


All the power is probably making his nuts grow mighty big.

----------


## Roidal

> I don't know who is going to supercede Putin or what his replacement will be like, but i'm glad he's going. He's doing/done his best to alienate Russia from The West.


Just another old KGB comrade, they're all running the show in Moscow right now.

----------


## Teabagger

I'm against the expansion of NATO, we don't need it, and it is outdated anyway. I can understand Russia's concern. No different than if Canada and Mexico had joined the Warsaw Pact. 

But his bluster about an arms race is bs. Russia is broke...........

----------


## Pooks

> I'm against the expansion of NATO, we don't need it, and it is outdated anyway. I can understand Russia's concern. No different than if Canada and Mexico had joined the Warsaw Pact. 
> 
> But his bluster about an arms race is bs. Russia is broke...........


Arm races always defy budgets.. hell look at our national debt as an example hehe...


Russia BTW is making a killing on Oil, and Steel, and other commodities, during these times of rising inflation and racked up national debts on fiat currencies around the world..

The common man in Russia might be doing awful, but there are some seriously rich people there as well... I don't really know the facts on how Russian govern's itself but looking at the wide gap between the rich and the poor, they might be more of a anarcho-capitalist type of nation, than we are... we might be way more socialist with our neverending web of funded welfare programs.

----------


## Logan13

> I find it quite hypocritical that we're sitting here talking about him alienating Russia when in reality all he is trying to do is provide a strong national defense for his country. Russia pales in comparison to the United States as far as flexing it's military power and being rather Imperialistic.


Maybe Russia and China will nuke the US in order to free you from all the tyranny you are living under here presently. I think that you had better figure out which team you are on...

----------


## Prada

> Maybe Russia and China will nuke the US in order to free you from all the tyranny you are living under here presently. I think that you had better figure out which team you are on...


How did you cerebrate that hypothesis?

----------


## Kärnfysikern

> Maybe Russia and China will nuke the US in order to free you from all the tyranny you are living under here presently. I think that you had better figure out which team you are on...


So its Russia and China vs the US again? When did that happen.

----------


## Logan13

> How did you cerebrate that hypothesis?


someone who wants to whine about the US and back Russia in this discussion needs a big dose of reality.

----------


## Kärnfysikern

> someone who wants to whine about the US and back Russia in this discussion needs a big dose of reality.


So if russia wants to build a missile shield in mexico, just for defensive purposed offcourse, you would not think that is a insult towards america?

----------


## Pooks

> So if russia wants to build a missile shield in mexico, just for defensive purposed offcourse, you would not think that is a insult towards america?


haha if they did that, we'd blast them with all our nukes.. and THEY know this.

----------


## Logan13

> So if russia wants to build a missile shield in mexico, just for defensive purposed offcourse, you would not think that is a insult towards america?


When this becomes reality and not theory, we will discuss....
Until then, one has absolutely nothing to do with the other.
We have been through this, it is a defensive weapon.

----------


## Pooks

> When this becomes reality and not theory, we will discuss....
> Until then, one has absolutely nothing to do with the other.
> We have been through this, it is a defensive weapon.


YEP USA still number 1..

Russia couldn't deploy such a system, even if they wanted too.. hell maybe the really want too.. but can't... why can't they..

cause of USA!! haha Russia OWNED.

----------


## Kärnfysikern

> When this becomes reality and not theory, we will discuss....
> Until then, one has absolutely nothing to do with the other.
> We have been through this, it is a defensive weapon.


One has everything to do with the other, you and me both know that if that where to happen you would find it incredibly offensive. I dont understand your inability to look at this from a russian perspective? It doesnt matter if it is a defensive weapon or not. What matter is that it is souring the relation betwen Russia and NATO and no body gains from that. Its obvious to everyone on this planet, except you and Bush, that it is a incredibly offensive and insulting move.

Do you realy think the world will be a more secure place if america builds a completely useless missile shield in former warszawa pact countries and at the same time make a enemy of russia again?

If you want the word to become more secure enter into more stringent disarmament treaties with russia. Megatons to megawatts was a hell of a good start, imagine if someone during the cold war had said that around the year 2000 a large chunk of american electricity will be produced by uranium formerly used in warheads targeted at american cities.

----------


## Pooks

That's a child's argument..." look at it from my own viewpoint" "u're such a hypocrite" etc...

those are arguments made by the powerless, and those out of control.
That's what Russia is .. its like an adolescant.. Its trying to rebel but it can't, cause its weaker..

so lets look at it from the perspective on the United States.. U have this belligerent Russia, trying to act tough and big again.. 

Its a defeated Nation, trying to restore itself to past glory...

Like when Mike Tyson went up against Evander Holyfield for the second time..
he couln't do anything, other than bite Evander on the leg, and the ear..
and than just get knocked out...

so yeah Russia is still a danger.. so this shield is not useless. it has a major purpose to when ti comes to pack-order in the World.

it shields Europe and the United States from Russia, and keeps the two of us, more prominent and influencial in the world, than Russia.

----------


## Logan13

> That's a child's argument..." look at it from my own viewpoint" "u're such a hypocrite" etc...
> 
> those are arguments made by the powerless, and those out of control.
> That's what Russia is .. its like an adolescant.. Its trying to rebel but it can't, cause its weaker..
> 
> so lets look at it from the perspective on the United States.. U have this belligerent Russia, trying to act tough and big again.. 
> 
> Its a defeated Nation, trying to restore itself to past glory...
> 
> ...



Thank you for taking the time. I'm tired of replying to the same shit over and over.

----------


## Kärnfysikern

> That's a child's argument..." look at it from my own viewpoint" "u're such a hypocrite" etc...
> 
> those are arguments made by the powerless, and those out of control.
> That's what Russia is .. its like an adolescant.. Its trying to rebel but it can't, cause its weaker..
> 
> so lets look at it from the perspective on the United States.. U have this belligerent Russia, trying to act tough and big again.. 
> 
> Its a defeated Nation, trying to restore itself to past glory...
> 
> ...


The shield is completely and utterly useless. You are aware that Russia has more operational nuclear warheads than america? 

The shield could perhaps stop a few ICBM if its lucky, but it could do nothing against a full scale attack from any of the major nuclear powers. Even china with just around 200 nukes could easily overwhelm it.

Not to mention it wouldnt do a thing against nuclear weapons launched from subs. 

What should be done is that russia and the us agree to limit their nuclear stockpile to a few hundred nukes. More then enough for detereant and it will limit the risk of a nuke falling into the wrong hands alot.

----------


## Kärnfysikern

> Thank you for taking the time. I'm tired of replying to the same shit over and over.


Yupp. good old USA can never do anything wrong and is always right no matter what.

----------


## Pooks

> Yupp. good old USA can never do anything wrong and is always right no matter what.


I dont know the real purpose of the shield, but maybe it proves itself of use some day.

but.. We are blowing up a rogue sattelite soon! ..

I wish they'd stick a cam on that warhead, and we could watch it fly and hit.

----------


## Logan13

> Yupp. good old USA can never do anything wrong and is always right no matter what.


alright.

----------


## thegodfather

> That's a child's argument..." look at it from my own viewpoint" "u're such a hypocrite" etc...
> 
> those are arguments made by the powerless, and those out of control.
> That's what Russia is .. its like an adolescant.. Its trying to rebel but it can't, cause its weaker..
> 
> so lets look at it from the perspective on the United States.. U have this belligerent Russia, trying to act tough and big again.. 
> 
> Its a defeated Nation, trying to restore itself to past glory...
> 
> ...



Wow....very impressive. That was a nice way to reduce your thinking to that of a neandrathal, pre homosapien type thinking right there. "The strong control the weak." Is that how it is? What an arrogant attitude to have about the rest of the world. Just because you are the most powerful, does not necessarily mean that you should do whatever the hell you please on any given day, and say screw you to the rest of the world. You think that because we are the worlds #1 superpower that we can run around and do whatever we like, piss off other nations, and say tough shit do something about it? How bout that, are you willing to risk YOUR mom, dad, son, brother, or sisters life to do so? Until then, you might want to keep your opinions and blazen disregard to other humans in the world to yourself. 

I thought that Imperialism ended shortly after the 1800s? Perhaps I was mistaken, there still seem to be simple minded people in the world that think we should be able to control other SOVEREIGN entitys. What a crock of shit. We sure do talk a big game about being the example to the rest of the world for individual liberty, but our countries actions and policies sure do contraindict that. 


*ARROGANT.... Definition:* 
making claims or pretensions to superior importance or rights; overbearingly assuming; insolently proud:

Having or displaying a sense of overbearing self-worth or self-importance. 

having or showing feelings of unwarranted importance out of overbearing pride;

----------


## Pooks

Its only arrogance if its based on ignorance..

this is not..

these are facts.
We are the alpha-nation..

like the Alpha-male guys get the chicks, and the loser does not.
The same concept works with nations.
The strong get the resources, the weak do not.

This is a human condition, this is normal.
All other thinking, is socialist marxist brainwashing, that sadly begins in this country once we enter school and get exposed to Teachers.

Teachers are gov't workers, who get paid by BIG GOVT.
they are socialists.

u need to realize that 12+ years of your life you are being trained to act the opposite of what is natural..

people need to take control over their own lifes and responsibilities once you are on your own,.. or u'll end up just another democratic vote, giving your money to them in tax form, and not even sure why u do it.. but it has something to do with being 'good'.

being 'good' cause you give the government money.

**** THAT!!

be good by keeping that money, and spend it on opening a business, and hire people..

GO RON PAUL!
Ron Paul is a republican for a reason.
its the lesser of 2 evils.. Democrats are fascists haehe

----------


## Logan13

> Wow....very impressive. That was a nice way to reduce your thinking to that of a neandrathal, pre homosapien type thinking right there. "The strong control the weak." Is that how it is? What an arrogant attitude to have about the rest of the world. Just because you are the most powerful, does not necessarily mean that you should do whatever the hell you please on any given day, and say screw you to the rest of the world. You think that because we are the worlds #1 superpower that we can run around and do whatever we like, piss off other nations, and say tough shit do something about it? How bout that, are you willing to risk YOUR mom, dad, son, brother, or sisters life to do so? Until then, you might want to keep your opinions and blazen disregard to other humans in the world to yourself. 
> 
> I thought that Imperialism ended shortly after the 1800s? Perhaps I was mistaken, there still seem to be simple minded people in the world that think we should be able to control other SOVEREIGN entitys. What a crock of shit. We sure do talk a big game about being the example to the rest of the world for individual liberty, but our countries actions and policies sure do contraindict that. 
> 
> 
> *ARROGANT.... Definition:* 
> making claims or pretensions to superior importance or rights; overbearingly assuming; insolently proud:
> 
> Having or displaying a sense of overbearing self-worth or self-importance. 
> ...


another post by you that attempts to discredit the US...........

----------


## Prada

> someone who wants to whine about the US and back Russia in this discussion needs a big dose of reality.


Do you not ever question the motives of your own government? Or do you indiscriminately and blindly give the green card to all their actions? Even when Bill Clinton was in power?

In my case its not a question of backing one or the other, it is the analysis of actions and reactions.




> I dont know the real purpose of the shield, but maybe it proves itself of use some day.


Ahh but perhaps you should ask yourself this question.

----------


## Logan13

> Do you not ever question the motives of your own government? Or do you indiscriminately and blindly give the green card to all their actions? Even when Bill Clinton was in power?
> 
> In my case its not a question of backing one or the other, it is the analysis of actions and reactions.
> 
> 
> 
> Ahh but perhaps you should ask yourself this question.


It is not that someone questions their gov't's motives, is that this is all that they do. To believe that you or anyone else here knows the inner workings of matters which you are not privy to is silly. There are supporters and detractors. Many of these detractors in here are 20-something YO college students who do not have the experience to know any better. They are just modern versions of the "Hippy"...........

----------


## thegodfather

> It is not that someone questions their gov't's motives, is that this is all that they do. To believe that you or anyone else here knows the inner workings of matters which you are not privy to is silly. There are supporters and detractors. Many of these detractors in here are 20-something YO college students who do not have the experience to know any better. They are just modern versions of the "Hippy"...........


Being critical of your government is an essential part to any well functioning healthy "Democracy." Your post would insinuate that I detest every single action and policy of this government, and that is just not the case. However, there are key significant issues to which I do strongly oppose. I make posts which I feel support my position. I'm sorry, or rather I'm not, if I post news articles and threads which make the United States look like a complete joke and utterly hypocritical.

I am however very sorry, if you do not have the ability to look at issues from more than just ONE perspective. That is extremely narrow minded, and not the type of behavior I would expect from a well educated professional such as yourself. To dismiss the correlation between a US missile shield in a neighboring country to Russia, as a Russian missile shield in Mexico. To dismiss such a valid point is narrow minded arrogance.

----------


## Kärnfysikern

> It is not that someone questions their gov't's motives, is that this is all that they do. To believe that you or anyone else here knows the inner workings of matters which you are not privy to is silly. There are supporters and detractors. Many of these detractors in here are 20-something YO college students who do not have the experience to know any better. They are just modern versions of the "Hippy"...........


And we all know age is the number one indicator of intelligence and knoweledge.  :Don't know:

----------


## Kärnfysikern

> I am however very sorry, if you do not have the ability to look at issues from more than just ONE perspective. That is extremely narrow minded, and not the type of behavior I would expect from a well educated professional such as yourself. To dismiss the correlation between a US missile shield in a neighboring country to Russia, as a Russian missile shield in Mexico. To dismiss such a valid point is narrow minded arrogance.


 :Party Smiley TAP:

----------


## Logan13

> Being critical of your government is an essential part to any well functioning healthy "Democracy." Your post would insinuate that I detest every single action and policy of this government, and that is just not the case. However, there are key significant issues to which I do strongly oppose. I make posts which I feel support my position. I'm sorry, or rather I'm not, if I post news articles and threads which make the United States look like a complete joke and utterly hypocritical.
> 
> I am however very sorry, if you do not have the ability to look at issues from more than just ONE perspective. That is extremely narrow minded, and not the type of behavior I would expect from a well educated professional such as yourself. To dismiss the correlation between a US missile shield in a neighboring country to Russia, as a Russian missile shield in Mexico. To dismiss such a valid point is narrow minded arrogance.


If all that you are is critical, you will lose any audience that you might have had, except for the "crazies". There is alot more good that you could be concentrating on. Hate and contempt inspires NO ONE!

----------


## Amorphic

> The shield is completely and utterly useless. You are aware that Russia has more operational nuclear warheads than america? 
> 
> The shield could perhaps stop a few ICBM if its lucky, but it could do nothing against a full scale attack from any of the major nuclear powers. Even china with just around 200 nukes could easily overwhelm it.
> 
> Not to mention it wouldnt do a thing against nuclear weapons launched from subs. 
> 
> What should be done is that russia and the us agree to limit their nuclear stockpile to a few hundred nukes. More then enough for detereant and it will limit the risk of a nuke falling into the wrong hands alot.


i dont understand how logan and pooks can argue with something that is practically spoon fed to them and articulated so clearly.

it boggles my mind how some of you guys are so blindly patriotic to the point of national fundamentalism. 

just because you live in the states does not mean that everything the US does is right, especially when its so completely obvious in this thread that russia is just trying to restore some of their previous strength and soverignity.

instead we get logan fabricating imaginary scenarios about china and russia bombing the states, come on.

the point has been proven by both karn and godfather, there is no rebuttal to be made about the FACTS

----------


## Logan13

> i dont understand how logan and pooks can argue with something that is practically spoon fed to them and articulated so clearly.
> 
> it boggles my mind how some of you guys are so blindly patriotic to the point of national fundamentalism. 
> 
> just because you live in the states does not mean that everything the US does is right, especially when its so completely obvious in this thread that russia is just trying to restore some of their previous strength and soverignity.
> 
> instead we get logan fabricating imaginary scenarios about china and russia bombing the states, come on.
> 
> the point has been proven by both karn and godfather, there is no rebuttal to be made about the FACTS


You have obviously picked your side, do not pretend to deny me the same courtesy. What is fact, that I should want a nuclear strong Russia? Why should I as an American want that? You can parcel all you want from your island of neutrality, my American family and I do not want to see another USSR. That, my friend, is the only fact that I care about. Let me guess, your another college student who thinks he knows evrything about world politics, right? Don't you have some homework to do? :Icon Rolleyes:

----------


## Amorphic

> You have obviously picked your side, do not pretend to deny me the same courtesy. What is fact, that I should want a nuclear strong Russia? Why should I as an American want that? You can parcel all you want from your island of neutrality, my American family and I do not want to see another USSR. That, my friend, is the only fact that I care about. Let me guess, your another college student who thinks he knows evrything about world politics, right? Don't you have some homework to do?


you fail to look at it from the standpoint of others. Why should the rest of the world want an arms rich america? why should russians have their soverienty threatened by one of the most weapons rich and (at this stage in history) agressive countries in the world.

Canada isnt an island either :Wink/Grin: 

I'm in college but i havent ever assumed i know everything about world politics, i just choose to look at the facts instead of being a stubborn nationalist.

and lastly, im on reading break for the week. no homework for me  :Wink/Grin:

----------


## Kärnfysikern

> You have obviously picked your side, do not pretend to deny me the same courtesy. What is fact, that I should want a nuclear strong Russia? Why should I as an American want that? You can parcel all you want from your island of neutrality, my American family and I do not want to see another USSR. That, my friend, is the only fact that I care about. Let me guess, your another college student who thinks he knows evrything about world politics, right? Don't you have some homework to do?


Well the simple truth is that russia will continue to have the same nuclear capabilites that the us has and there is nothing anyone can do about it except russia itself. It will always be easier to build better rockets than to build a better shield. 

If you really want a more secure word you should push your country to commit to more programs like megatons to megawatts. But peacefull programs might not be as sexy as building multi billion dollar useless shields?

----------


## Logan13

> you fail to look at it from the standpoint of others. Why should the rest of the world want an arms rich america? why should russians have their soverienty threatened by one of the most weapons rich and (at this stage in history) agressive countries in the world.
> 
> Canada isnt an island either
> 
> I'm in college but i havent ever assumed i know everything about world politics, i just choose to look at the facts instead of being a stubborn nationalist.
> 
> and lastly, im on reading break for the week. no homework for me


I am right about more than just your being a student.

----------


## Logan13

> Well the simple truth is that russia will continue to have the same nuclear capabilites that the us has and there is nothing anyone can do about it except russia itself. It will always be easier to build better rockets than to build a better shield. 
> 
> If you really want a more secure word you should push your country to commit to more programs like megatons to megawatts. But peacefull programs might not be as sexy as building *multi billion dollar useless shields*?


if they are useless, what is the issue?

----------


## Kärnfysikern

> if they are useless, what is the issue?


The issue is the insult towards russia and the effects it will have on peacefull projects like megatons to megawatts that can acctualy acomplish something.

Both russia and the us knows the shield is no threat against the russian deterant capability. But it is still a spit in the face to place it in former soviet countries. What can america possibly gain by insulting russia?

----------


## Logan13

> The issue is the insult towards russia and the effects it will have on peacefull projects like megatons to megawatts that can acctualy acomplish something.
> 
> Both russia and the us knows the shield is no threat against the russian deterant capability. But it is still a spit in the face to place it in former soviet countries. What can america possibly gain by insulting russia?


What about the Russia's insult of supplying Iran with nuke building materials or blocking UN sanctions? You did not seem to be out-spoken about that. Again, you need to become more consistent if your are going to offer your opinion.

----------


## Pooks

> when its so completely obvious in this thread that russia is just trying to restore some of their previous strength and soverignity.


EXACTLY!!

its like this.. The United States has got the GIRL now..

but her ex BF the RUSSIA is trying to restore itself back to some position involvement in our lives..

--
Hell yeah,, we'll try and kick them back down again..
thats how the world works.

We're number 1.. we got our buddies. . Europe.. Canada, Australia, Japan ok.. those are our buddies.. but they don't try and take our GF (shape global policies) away...they'll give input.. (maybe france a lil bit.. but thats the raunchy shaggy friend)

the Russian tried it after ww2.. and they lost.. and they'll lose again..

that might sound cocky.. but thats the attitude of confidence we need to portray.

----------


## Kärnfysikern

> What about the Russia's insult of supplying Iran with nuke building materials or blocking UN sanctions? You did not seem to be out-spoken about that. Again, you need to become more consistent if your are going to offer your opinion.


What is the problem with russia building a light water reactor in Iran and providing low enrichened fuel? Neither can be used for weapons purposes in anyway. It is not a insult in any imaginable way. Unless for those that think anything nuclear equals weapons.

----------


## BG

> One has everything to do with the other, you and me both know that if that where to happen you would find it incredibly offensive. I dont understand your inability to look at this from a russian perspective? It doesnt matter if it is a defensive weapon or not. What matter is that it is souring the relation betwen Russia and NATO and no body gains from that. Its obvious to everyone on this planet, except you and Bush, that it is a incredibly offensive and insulting move.
> 
> Do you realy think the world will be a more secure place if america builds a completely useless missile shield in former warszawa pact countries and at the same time make a enemy of russia again?
> 
> If you want the word to become more secure enter into more stringent disarmament treaties with russia. Megatons to megawatts was a hell of a good start, imagine if someone during the cold war had said that around the year 2000 a large chunk of american electricity will be produced by uranium formerly used in warheads targeted at american cities.


Well said !!!!!

----------


## Amorphic

> I am right about more than just your being a student.


care to elaborate?

----------


## Logan13

> What is the problem with russia building a light water reactor in Iran and providing low enrichened fuel? Neither can be used for weapons purposes in anyway. It is not a insult in any imaginable way. Unless for those that think anything nuclear equals weapons.


again, you give the benfit of doubt to those who least deserve it. There is really nothing else to say since you and I are both firmly committed to opposing sides. Just remember which side you were on.

----------


## Logan13

> care to elaborate?


I already have.

----------


## Amorphic

> I already have.


so under what justification does a pipe layer necessarily know more than a student?

i dont think my opinion can be brushed off under the circumstance that im a student.

----------


## Logan13

> so under what justification does a pipe layer necessarily know more than a student?
> 
> i dont think my opinion can be brushed off under the circumstance that im a student.


history books can only tell part of the whole story. There is a reason why we do not have 22YO US Senators..........

----------


## Amorphic

> history books can only tell part of the whole story. There is a reason why we do not have 22YO US Senators..........


lol, i think it would be fascinating to see what a younger generation would do with power if they had it.

----------


## Logan13

> lol, i think it would be fascinating to see what a younger generation would do with power if they had it.


Ah yes, banging out to 50 cent in the Congressional chambers would do wonders to insure the sanctity of the Republic.

----------


## Amorphic

> Ah yes, banging out to 50 cent in the Congressional chambers would do wonders to insure the sanctity of the Republic.


Yo shorty its yo birthday!

Come on logan, get with the times  :Wink/Grin:  :LOL:

----------


## Kärnfysikern

> again, you give the benfit of doubt to those who least deserve it. There is really nothing else to say since you and I are both firmly committed to opposing sides. Just remember which side you were on.


Okay then please tell me how Iran is going to use a light water reactor and low enrichened uranium to make a bomb. Im quite curious to know since they have no reprocessing facility and the isotopic composition of lwr plutonium is absolutely horrid for weapons purposes. Me not worrying about russias lwr doesnt require giving Iran the benifit of a doubt, there simply isnt any way to use a lwr for weapons purposes without a extraordinary effort.

Frankly when it comes to nuclear issues I know a heck of alot more than you.

----------


## Kärnfysikern

To justify my lack of worry about Russia building a lwr in Iran Il write exactly why I dont worry.

When you build a plutonium bomb the plutonium is formed as a shell or ball in a subcritical(i.e no self sustaining chain reaction can take place in that geometrical configuration) state. Around the shell/ball you place conventional explosives and in the middle you put a neutron source trigger, for instance a americium/beryllium mixture.

You blow up the explosives, the plutonium gets compressed into a supercritical state and booooom.

The thing is to get the maximum yield you want the chain reaction to get started at maximum compression or close, that is what the trigger for, to deliver neutrons at the right moment to kickstart the whole thing.

But you also have neutron production in the plutonium itself, so you can never say with 100% certainty when the chain reaction will get started. That means that the explosive yield of the bomb is in acctualy a probability distribution that depends on the rate of neutron production in the plutonium.

Different isotopes of plutonium produces neutrons at different rates.

The above grap shows different mixtures of Pu and the yield probabilities. Each line shows the probability to exceed a certain yield that is given in the upper right corner. UO2 core 45MWd/kg is light water reactor fuel at a avarage burnup(roughly speaking time spent in reactor). By looking at the graph you se that the probability to get a yield larger than 15% of design value is around 12%, so a 88% chanse the bomb will be crap. The probability to get a yield more than 50% of design value is more or less nonexistant.

Now the problems doesnt end with higher neutron production, the unwanted isotopes of Pu(every isotope except 239 basicly) also produce alot of heat due to higher rated of radioactive decay. This means the nice little ball of reactor grade Pu has a surface temperature of 241 degres celsius(465 Farenheit). Imagine the problems of building a nice bomb surrounded by explosed that is at such a high temperature and to get all the electronics ect to work not only in that temperature but also constantly exposed to radiation.

So sure you can theoreticaly make a extremely shitty and unreliable weapon out of the spent fuel from the russian lwr, I think you americans did try a few bombs like that out. BUT its so much easier to build a nice and cheap graphite moderated reactor running on natural uranium in some hidden bunker that produces almost pure Pu239 for a fraction of the cost.

So does that introductionary lecture in nuclear bomb making satisfy you on why I give the russian reactor the "benifit of a doubt"  :AaGreen22:

----------


## 100m champ

Cold War!

----------


## Logan13

> Okay then please tell me how Iran is going to use a light water reactor and low enrichened uranium to make a bomb. Im quite curious to know since they have no reprocessing facility and the isotopic composition of lwr plutonium is absolutely horrid for weapons purposes. Me not worrying about russias lwr doesnt require giving Iran the benifit of a doubt, there simply isnt any way to use a lwr for weapons purposes without a extraordinary effort.
> 
> Frankly when it comes to nuclear issues I know a heck of alot more than you.


I doubt that you know more than the State Department does.

----------


## Kärnfysikern

> I doubt that you know more than the State Department does.


If the state department states(please give a link) that the russian lwr is a proliferation risk they are plain wrong. The potential proliferation risk is the enrichment plant and the heavy water reactor they are planning *if* they in conjugation with it build a reprocessing plant.

----------


## RA

Karn is right that the missle shield would be overwealmed by any country that had a lot of nukes BUT this ability is just in its infancy. Wait until we perfect it to pass judgement. Through the years we have had naysayers on many advances. I agree not all of them have turned out but the US has always been on the cutting edge with military technology.

----------


## RA

Were not building the thing for Russia anyway. Iran, Korea, etc

----------


## Kärnfysikern

> Karn is right that the missle shield would be overwealmed by any country that had a lot of nukes BUT this ability is just in its infancy. Wait until we perfect it to pass judgement. Through the years we have had naysayers on many advances. I agree not all of them have turned out but the US has always been on the cutting edge with military technology.


The problem with such a shield is that it will always be alot easier and cheaper to build a better rocket that can fool the shield than it will be to uppgrade the shield. 




> Were not building the thing for Russia anyway. Iran, Korea, etc


But wouldnt it be a hell of alot better to place the shield in a place where it wont results in the seed of a new arms race?

----------


## RA

> The problem with such a shield is that it will always be alot easier and cheaper to build a better rocket that can fool the shield than it will be to uppgrade the shield.


No one thought the patriot missles would work :Wink/Grin: 

I hear what your saying but appeasement and diplomacy only go so far. What do you expect the US to do other than trying to defend itself?

----------


## Kärnfysikern

> No one thought the patriot missles would work
> 
> I hear what your saying but appeasement and diplomacy only go so far. What do you expect the US to do other than trying to defend itself?


Well the defensive value of the shield is highly in question, why not place it in the states instead if you realy think you need it? The current plan for placement doesnt seem like it is the only possibility. Placing it on former soviet territory is just asking for troubble. If this whole deal hinders the further dismantling and destruction of weapons material it will make the world alot unsafer.

----------


## RA

You mean Alaska? Its one of the 50 states and its a strategic location for shooting down any incoming ICBMs. Im not sure why Putin has his panties in a bunch anyway. The US has spelled out the countries its worried about and Russia is not one of them.

You hear were going to shoot down that satellite thats already coming down?




> Well the defensive value of the shield is highly in question, why not place it in the states instead if you realy think you need it? The current plan for placement doesnt seem like it is the only possibility. Placing it on former soviet territory is just asking for troubble. If this whole deal hinders the further dismantling and destruction of weapons material it will make the world alot unsafer.

----------


## Kärnfysikern

> You mean Alaska? Its one of the 50 states and its a strategic location for shooting down any incoming ICBMs. Im not sure why Putin has his panties in a bunch anyway. The US has spelled out the countries its worried about and Russia is not one of them.
> 
> You hear were going to shoot down that satellite thats already coming down?


yeah I heard about that, makes me wonder if the satellite was realy coming down or if it is a signal to china after they shoot down a satellite last year. :Hmmmm: 

I can understand Putin and Russia on this issue. Like I wrote earlier, would you be comfterable if Russia built a missile shield in say mexico or canada? To protect themself offcourse but not from the us.

----------


## Prada

> I can understand Putin and Russia on this issue. Like I wrote earlier, would you be comfterable if Russia built a missile shield in say mexico or canada? To protect themself offcourse but not from the us.


Right, under the pretext its against Cuba and/or Venezuela. I can guarantee that Bush would "have his panties in a bunch anyway".

Im also certain that Putin doesn't take everything that is stated at face value, he is smarter then that obviously.

----------


## RA

> yeah I heard about that, makes me wonder if the satellite was realy coming down or if it is a signal to china after they shoot down a satellite last year.
> 
> I can understand Putin and Russia on this issue. Like I wrote earlier, would you be comfterable if Russia built a missile shield in say mexico or canada? To protect themself offcourse but not from the us.


 
So the US is secretly planning a Russian invasion?  :LOL: 

I hadnt heard china did that...how the hell did they do that? They dont have the technology.

----------


## Kärnfysikern

> Right, under the pretext its against Cuba and/or Venezuela. I can guarantee that Bush would "have his panties in a bunch anyway".
> 
> Im also certain that Putin doesn't take everything that is stated at face value, he is smarter then that obviously.


Right on! The EU has been very quiet abut this whole thing. I wish the EU would strongly oppose it.





> So the US is secretly planning a Russian invasion? 
> 
> I hadnt heard china did that...how the hell did they do that? They dont have the technology.


How could you miss that news? It was all over the place!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/6289519.stm

Im not sure if your sarcastic with the last sentance  :Don't know:

----------


## RA

> Right on! The EU has been very quiet abut this whole thing. I wish the EU would strongly oppose it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> How could you miss that news? It was all over the place!
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/6289519.stm
> 
> Im not sure if your sarcastic with the last sentance


I must have been living under a rock. I really didnt think they had the capability to shoot down a satellite. Its not easy.

----------


## Kärnfysikern

> I must have been living under a rock. I really didnt think they had the capability to shoot down a satellite. Its not easy.


China do have some very nice technology. When it comes to nuclear tech for instance they are quickly catching on and in some cases are even ahead of USA and Europe. They publish more papers in nanotech research than the US does. Stem cell treatments are already available in china, but that is mostly because of difference in regulation rather than more advanced science.

Its like I have been saying, the US and Europe isnt hungry for success anymore. Thats why China and India will fly right past us if we dont wake the **** up. They have grand visions for the future and the motivation to acomplish those visions. The avarage european or american only vision is to watch idol during the weekend.

----------


## RA

So we need an arms race. 




> China do have some very nice technology. When it comes to nuclear tech for instance they are quickly catching on and in some cases are even ahead of USA and Europe. They publish more papers in nanotech research than the US does. Stem cell treatments are already available in china, but that is mostly because of difference in regulation rather than more advanced science.
> 
> Its like I have been saying, the US and Europe isnt hungry for success anymore. Thats why China and India will fly right past us if we dont wake the **** up. They have grand visions for the future and the motivation to acomplish those visions. The avarage european or american only vision is to watch idol during the weekend.

----------


## Kärnfysikern

> So we need an arms race.


I would prefer a space race  :Smilie:  A arms race with MAD still in effect is just masturbation.
If it looks like china will be the first nation to put a flag on mars maby america will wake up  :Big Grin: 

But if you guys have become as decadent as europe then we can forget about that.

----------


## RA

> *I would prefer a space race*  A arms race with MAD still in effect is just masturbation.
> If it looks like china will be the first nation to put a flag on mars maby america will wake up 
> 
> But if you guys have become as decadent as europe then we can forget about that.


I would as well. The problem is that the NASA budget hasnt been a priority for too long. We need something that would gin up some excitement for space exploration. I dont even know if China saying they were going to Mars first would do it or not.

----------


## Kärnfysikern

As I se it, if we can not going to shape up we simply deserve to be the losers while china and india marches on. 
Aslong as technology and science progress I dont care much of it is scientists named smith or ping pong that is doing the research.

The number one problem with science in the west is that the precautionary principle is applied to an absurd extent. We do not accept any risk, no matter how small, even if the return might be huge.

----------


## Kärnfysikern

Seems like I have been making a misstake when I claim enrollment to science and engineering programs in the west has gone down. Atleast in america its quite the opposit. Go USA!

http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/infbrief/nsf08302/

----------


## sphincter

> haha if they did that, we'd blast them with all our nukes.. and THEY know this.


ummm, actually, All our nukes are used only under the MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) concept. We will not ever act first with nukes again (unless the politicians redefine terms again..)

----------


## sphincter

> What about the Russia's insult of supplying Iran with nuke building materials or blocking UN sanctions? You did not seem to be out-spoken about that. Again, you need to become more consistent if your are going to offer your opinion.


EXACTLY!! People who are OBJECTIVElY assessing a situation won't blindly follow a principle just because of national or other affiliation. In the case of supplying nukes to Iran, Russia is wrong, in regards to being within their rights to defend themselves, they are right.

Objectivity will bring much more clarity into a situation so that you can THEN make a decision based on true facts and information and then you can mix in all the neo-political BS you like to.

----------


## Kärnfysikern

> EXACTLY!! People who are OBJECTIVElY assessing a situation won't blindly follow a principle just because of national or other affiliation. In the case of supplying nukes to Iran, Russia is wrong, in regards to being within their rights to defend themselves, they are right.
> 
> Objectivity will bring much more clarity into a situation so that you can THEN make a decision based on true facts and information and then you can mix in all the neo-political BS you like to.


Russia isnt supplying "nukes" to iran. They are building a power reactor and supplying low enrichend uranium(U235<5%). SO in what way is that "wrong"? Its not wrong from any imaginable perspective since it is not usable for weapons purposes.

----------


## soulstealer

> Russia isnt supplying "nukes" to iran. They are building a power reactor and supplying low enrichend uranium(U235<5%). SO in what way is that "wrong"? Its not wrong from any imaginable perspective since it is not usable for weapons purposes.


Exactly it would be as if we we're worried about a samurai showdown and Russia went and gave Iran a butter knife.... Ya it could kill someone if they get close enough  :LOL:  but not goona do much against a katana and we wanna bomb the shit out of them because of that  :What?:

----------


## Prada

> Russia isnt supplying "nukes" to iran. They are building a power reactor and supplying low enrichend uranium(U235<5%). SO in what way is that "wrong"? Its not wrong from any imaginable perspective since it is not usable for weapons purposes.


Correct






> Exactly it would be as if we we're worried about a samurai showdown and Russia went and gave Iran a butter knife.... Ya it could kill someone if they get close enough but not goona do much against a katana and we wanna bomb the shit out of them because of that


Interesting analogy.

----------


## gixxerboy1

> EXACTLY!! People who are OBJECTIVElY assessing a situation won't blindly follow a principle just because of national or other affiliation. In the case of supplying nukes to Iran, Russia is wrong, in regards to being within their rights to defend themselves, they are right.
> 
> Objectivity will bring much more clarity into a situation so that you can THEN make a decision based on true facts and information and then you can mix in all the neo-political BS you like to.


And we dont belive Russia or Iran when they say its for a reactor. 

But the world is supposed to believe us when we say its just a missile deffence shield in Poland. But its nothing against you Russia.

----------


## Pooks

> And we dont belive Russia or Iran when they say its for a reactor. 
> 
> But the world is supposed to believe us when we say its just a missile deffence shield in Poland. But its nothing against you Russia.


Cool.. yah Iran can worry about itself and try to go nuclear.
and we'll worry about ourselves and bomb em.

Russia can worry about itself, and oppose us at every turn in international policies,
and we'll worry about ourselves, and build a missile defence shield, starting with our friends in Poland.

----------


## gixxerboy1

> Cool.. yah Iran can worry about itself and try to go nuclear.
> and we'll worry about ourselves and bomb em.
> 
> Russia can worry about itself, and oppose us at every turn in international policies,
> and we'll worry about ourselves, and build a missile defence shield, starting with our friends in Poland.


I'm just saying we dont believe anyone else when they are doing something. But yet we are suprised when the rest of the world doesnt believe us.

----------


## Pooks

> I'm just saying we dont believe anyone else when they are doing something. But yet we are suprised when the rest of the world doesnt believe us.


I'm sure they are suprised also that we don't believe them too hehe

----------

