Russia tests missles

greenspun.com : LUSENET : TimeBomb 2000 (Y2000) : One Thread

Russia Launches Strategic Missile

By VLADIMIR ISACHENKOV Associated Press Writer

MOSCOW (AP) -- Russia launched a new strategic missile today and used the occasion to issue another reminder of Moscow's nuclear capability and warn the West against criticizing its offensive in breakaway Chechnya.

Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, who witnessed the test, said Russia ``will use all diplomatic and military-political levers in its disposal,'' to confront Western opposition.

Putin's comments came in a speech to military officers at the Plesetsk launch pad in northwestern Russia, after the successful test-firing of a Topol-M intercontinental ballistic missile. The missile was launched from Plesetsk and flew across Russia, hitting its target on the Kamchatka peninsula, some 3,400 miles to the east.

``The diplomatic levers are clear, and as for military ones, today's successful launch of the Topol-M intercontinental ballistic missile is one of them,'' Putin said, according to Russian news agencies.

Putin's warning followed last week's tough statement from President Boris Yeltsin, who reminded President Clinton that ``Russia is a great power that possesses a nuclear arsenal.'' Yeltsin was reacting to U.S. criticism of the Chechnya campaign.

-- Llama man (llama@cool.net), December 14, 1999

Answers

This must be the most "Tested" missile system on Earth. By my count this is the fifth launch since the first of the year, with multiple launches preceeding the initial mass production. Not one of these missiles has failed in a test to date, a track record unmatched by the United States or any other nuclear power.

-- Nikoli Krushev (doomsday@y2000.com), December 14, 1999.

That noise in the west, like a junk wagon on a rough road, is the sound of rattleing sabers.

-- smfdoc (smfdoc@aol.com), December 14, 1999.

If Bill (or Hillary) want to compare weiner sizes with Putin and Yeltsin, that's fine, but in the meantime, wouldn't it be nice if we cut off their aid until they're ready to behave?

Bummer for the Russian people, but as I understand it, we've been giving dollars, not direct material aid, and they seem to be spending more on tanks than tractors at the moment. That's bad enough, but to then have them turn around and hold the gun that WE paid for to our heads is a little too much.

I'm sure the Russian people could survive the blow to their national pride if the next tracked vehicle to roll out of a factory (the T- 00?) had a grain chute and not a cannon.

Let's not live in fear. Go on Bill, call their bluff. Or if you're not man enough, I'm sure Hillary is.

-- Servant (public_service@yahoo.com), December 14, 1999.


I notice Putin is doing the saber-rattling now. After Yeltzin's nuke threat wasn't he the one trying to make nice-nice noises to smooth everything over? Badenough with one crazy Russian with an itchy trigger finger, but now the both of them???

-- Linda (lwmb@psln.com), December 14, 1999.

We should hire the russian mob to whack all those lunatics. Tell the mafia that they can have the whole country...just to give us the nukes. Sounds like a workable deal...

-- Billy Boy (Rakkasan101st@aol.com), December 14, 1999.


Putin is no friend of the US. He is simply less bombastic than Yeltsin. If these events don't worry you, then you either aren't paying attention or you are a "nuke polly" (as BB calls them).

Allow me to quote from an article entitled Yeltsin Puts Missiles On Red Alert from December 11:

While putting Russia's missiles on alert is seen as posturing bluster, Britain's foremost independent nuclear expert, John Large, warned it was a foolish manoeuvre, particularly in relation to the millennium bug, for which it is feared Russia is still ill-prepared.

"There was an unwritten agreement for both Russia and the US not to deploy nuclear weapons before the Y2K period," he said.

"Even if the weapons themselves are OK - which I very much doubt since their testing system has been effectively down and out for three years - they would have to work within the strategic defence system there which is full of Y2K glitches. There is no real need for it - it is a risk they don't need to take.

"I am not suggesting that these nuclear bombs will go off on their own, but we do expect to see the defence systems playing up a bit."

If Britian's foremost independent nuclear weapons expert believes that Russia's nuclear weapons systems won't survive Y2K, don't you think the Russian experts have come to that same conclusion also?

If so, what will Russia do about it? Will they be content to watch their nuclear arsenal turn into a pumpkin at midnight on 12/31/99? Or could there possibly be a temptation to use those nukes before then, in order to make sure that US/NATO doesn't have too big an advantage after the rollover?

We certainly live in dangerous times. Ignoring a threat does not make it go away...

-- Nabi (nabi7@yahoo.com), December 14, 1999.


What sense does that make? Use them before they're unusable? Nuclear bombs have ALWAYS been unusable. For a superpower to launch a nuke is the equivalent of committing suicide and bringing the entire population of the planet with you.

Lets hope they aren't completely suicidal.

-- Nobody (f@no.com), December 14, 1999.


I think that it should be made known loud and clear that genicide commited by any nation state will not be tolerated. Weather it is Russia,China or the US. If this stuff is not stopped it will not be business as usual. The whole world is watching. Remeber wwII if we dont remember the past f-ups we are doomed to repeat them. Our generation says no to war you out of control b- heads. War means the death of our entire planet (get-it) Stupidity is ruling the world right now.

-- y2k aware mike (y2k aware mike @ conservation . com), December 14, 1999.

Top Russian millitary Defectors have stated that the Russians are planning a first strike attack and believe they can survive what ever retaliation Europe and the United States is able to give. Over The last few years they have been building under ground bunker cities, beefing up their nuclear arsonal,and forming stratigic alliances with the our enemies.

Nuclear war isn't as far fetched as some would have you believe.

-- Gambler (scotanna@arosnet.com), December 14, 1999.


I wonder if Putin does 'putin' on his 'puter.

-- Dave (aaa@aaa.com), December 14, 1999.


I know this may sound simplistic, and off the wall, sarcastic but I find it odd to think how many people in our nation call themselves Christians, but yet when these same are encountered with a "threat of dying", they are usually the first to run for shelter. Hmmm... Isn't life after death suppose to be the eternal life, the end to all pain and suffering. If so, why not embrace death with open arms?

Just curious! And I dislike hypocrisy!!!

-- Antoinette (freelady99@netcarrier.com), December 14, 1999.


Antoinette,

Is your idea of Christianity that one would convert and then put a gun in their mouth in order to hasten to heaven??? Maybe you should read the Book sometime...

-- Nabi (nabi7@yahoo.com), December 14, 1999.


Reply to Antoinette:

Moses said, "Choose life, not death."

Your life has a purpose. Choose to fulfill it, not to cut it short before your allotted time is up.

-- Suzanne (sdumolin@slip.net), December 14, 1999.


Antoinette. I suppose by your line of reasoning al christians should go ahead and bash their childrens heads on rocks at birth to send them on to their maker, bypassing this hell on earth. Or should we wait until they are in their toddling years, discovering the joy of a pet and doting grandparents? Perhaps it would be best to wait until they have entered sunday school and found other children, some of whom will turn out to be lifelong friends while the basic Christian morals are taught to them? Surely it should be before they have entered high school and experience the overwhelming joy and sorrow of first love? Have we waited too long when they have gone to college in quest of life and career? Surely that walk down the Aisle of marriage should be denied any young bride in favor of death. No need whatsoever for the young father and mother to come full circle into the delivery room, assuming their God intended roles as parents and counselors. Or as the years fade like the color of their hair and the wisdom of life earned etches itself around their eyes, should we not at all cost deny them Grandparenthood? Should Christians rush to death as you suggest, without having learned the lessons they need to prosper in heaven? I think not.

-- Nikoli Krushev (doomsday@y2000.com), December 14, 1999.

Excellent, Nikolai. Have had similar thoughts throughout the years.

-- Sheri (wncy2k@nccn.net), December 14, 1999.


Right now it is obvious that Russia has an inferiority complex and wants to prove to the world that it still matters. Their pride has been severely bruised and they don't intend to meekly submit to the West's notions and order of progress.

I think relations are at an all-time low and this is a pity. It could have gone so much better with a better President who was stronger, more stoic, and less obnoxious to ex-Soviet sensibilities. Now we face crisis which might be avertable but hope diminishes with each passing day. The words "Weimar" and "Russia" seem oddly logical in juxaposition with each other. It's a damn shame because the Russian people are tough, smart, wry, and reserved yet extremely generous. They have some of the best scientists in the world. They could have had much to offer the world if we had encouraged their prosperity not paranoia.

Now I am praying that I don't hear the Russian government claim that the West was behind the Chechnya uprising. If they believe the West is responsible for Chechnya, this will be touted as an act of war. And the rest will be, well, a terrible chapter in history.

-- coprolith (coprolith@fakemail.com), December 14, 1999.


You're correct Antoinette, most Christians are not cowards like some of the lost souls you've been seeing on this forum. By allowing himself to be crucified, Jesus had hoped to teach us that we have the ability within us to overcome all of our earthly woes if we just allow our soul to be our guide, although many still do not believe this. It was not necessary for his body to die in order to be Divine, but this was the only way he could hope to make us understand, by actually demonstrating that his spirit was still alive beyond the loss of his physical existence. So the lesson was not that we need to kill ourselves in order to experience heaven on earth, but that we already possess that ability within our God-given souls. His lesson also demonstrated that when we are confronted by the possibility of the loss of our earthly existence there is no reason for fear, because our spiritual existence will not be diminished in any way.

-- Hawk (flyin@high.again), December 14, 1999.

AS JUST ANOTHER COMMONER HERE IN THE U.S.A, SURROUNDED BY OTHER...COMMONERS...I FIND THAT MY INTEREST IN THE POLITICAL HAPPENINGS OF THE TIMES, ALONG WITH MY INTEREST IN OTHER DOMESTIC ISSUES THAT ARE CERTAIN CATALYSTS FOR SOCIAL CHANGE, FALL ON DEAF EARS. IT SEEMS THAT THOSE WITH WHOM I WORK, EVEN THOUGH EDUCATED FROM FINE INSTITUTIONS, PROTECT THEMSELVES WITH DENIAL AND WITH EXPLANATIONS THAT THEY CONSIDER "REASONABLE". THE REAL TRADGEDY IS THAT WAR AND MASS DESTRUCTION ARE NOT REASONABLE, YET A THREAT, MORE NOW THAN EVER. I OFTEN THINK OF THE GRASSHOPPER AND THE ANT, AND WONDER...WHAT IF THE ANT CALLED UPON HIS FRIENDS, ATTACKED THE GRASSHOPPER AND STORED HIM AS FOOD. BOTTOM LINE...ONCE A BEAR...ALWAYS A BEAR. IT IS A SHAME THAT WE SIT PASSIVELY BY, ALLOWING OUR NATION TO GO IN THE TOILET, DENYING ANY THREAT FROM Y2K, DENYING ANY THREAT FROM THE BEAR....TRUSTING THAT WE WILL SURVIVE. THE GREAT MELTING POT MAY VERY WELL BE...THE GREAT "MELTING" POT. GOD HAVE MERCY UPON US ALL..FOREIGN AND DOMESTIC.

-- STEVE WARREN JR (NOMADICAN@AOL.COM), December 15, 1999.

As it has been said, "He who lives by the sword, shall perish by the sword."

-- Wilfred Mische (mischw02@stcloudstate.edu), December 15, 1999.

Wilfred, no truer words have been spoken. In fact it is his own sword that will lead him to perish.

A man, who is in fear of being attacked by a bear, chooses to carry a big stick. The bear senses the fear in the man, senses that the man intends to use the stick as a weapon, the bear fears it will be attacked, thus the bear attacks the man in order to defend itself. It was the fear within the man which brought this attack upon himself.

Fear begets fear.

A man who does not allow himself to be afraid of the bear does not need to carry a big stick. The bear does not sense any fear in this man, and thus does not feel threatened. The man and the bear each respect the right of the other to exist, and become accustomed to each other's presence. They know that they can survive as long as they do not present a threat to each other.

Fear is weakness, because it is not real.

True strength comes from love, because it is all that is.

Some have yet to attain the level of awareness when they will see this reality, and let go of their fear. Collectively, however, the human race as a whole must abide by this reality, or we will fail to survive as a species of life on this planet.

This is simply how it is.

-- Hawk (flyin@high.again), December 15, 1999.


I think you are all missing a big point here. Russians don't think the way we do, so all of your posterizing comes to naught, unless you understand the doctrines under which they have lived for years.

Russia has never seen a nuclear war as unsurvivable. As early as the 60s, they were building underground cities and teaching their people what to do to survive nuclear war.

Russians believe in "First Strike"--They always have. If you think they listen or are moved by the US population of anti-nuclear activists... youre wrong. They see nuclear war not only as survivable, but as a high possibilty in their future. The Star Wars Defense outlined by Reagan was what finally brought the Russians to consider that they just might not suceed--so opened talks with the West.

Yes economical situation is bleak there. But the welfare of the Russian people comes secondarily to the Military position--it always has. Seeing Western aid going to that Military instead of the poor Russian people should have proven that fact.

Bill Clinton has pushed the US as a world policeman for too long. Some situations are meant for countries to manage on their own.We cannot dictate morals to the world--Especially by a President that has none! This stance has left us with many countries hating our superior attitude, our own Military spread very thin and with little defense against attack.If you think Russia isnt aware of this--you're wrong.

We might not be persuaded to start a nuclear war--but dont think that the rest of the world has our view. The Arabic community, North Korea, China and yes Russia, thinks quite differently than we do. Either we treat Russia as a super power or we will deal with them in ways none of us like.

I do agree that giving financial aid to those who would use it in weapons against us is ludicrous. We should have sent food and other types of aid, not money. And we should recognize that we are not the policeman for the world. Bill's ego will do us more damage than we can imagine, if he continues on this road.

-- River (Riverwn@aol.com), December 15, 1999.


Hawk you are an idiot. If a big hungry polar bear hapens upon your brave butt in the course of looking for a meal he WILL eat your fearless ass and pick his teeth with your bloody bones. How stupid can you get. Try walking up and shaking hands with a wild lion. Or a maneating Bengal Tiger. Are you really this dumb? How old are you anyway,12?

-- Nikoli Krushev (doomsday@y2000.com), December 15, 1999.

Hawk,

It appears the only thing you know less about than foreign affairs is Christianity.

-- Nabi (nabi7@yahoo.com), December 15, 1999.


coprolith, The Russians have already begun trying to pin the Chechnya crisis on the (US/NATO). For example:
...On Nov. 16, Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov wrote an article that appeared in The Financial Times

. It was entitled, "Thoughts on the eve of the Istanbul summit." Ivanov openly referred to the Chechen conflict as "a formal pretext" to launch an anti-Russian campaign in the West. Ivanov also said that the patrons of the Chechen terrorists are to be found in NATO.

According to Ivanov, "Moscow began to wonder whether Kosovo and Chechnya are just two links in a long chain of measures, aimed at building a world with NATO as its centre. Could Chechnya be used as a smokescreen?"

Ivanov then asked, "Could the anti-Russian campaign be unleashed for the purpose of driving Russia out from the Caucasus and later from Central Asia?"

What better justification for attacking the US/NATO than painting them as the ally of terrorists out to destroy Russia?

-- Nabi (nabi7@yahoo.com), December 15, 1999.

coprolith, The Russians have already begun trying to pin the Chechnya crisis on the (US/NATO). For example:
...On Nov. 16, Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov wrote an article that appeared in The Financial Times. It was entitled, "Thoughts on the eve of the Istanbul summit." Ivanov openly referred to the Chechen conflict as "a formal pretext" to launch an anti-Russian campaign in the West. Ivanov also said that the patrons of the Chechen terrorists are to be found in NATO.

According to Ivanov, "Moscow began to wonder whether Kosovo and Chechnya are just two links in a long chain of measures, aimed at building a world with NATO as its centre. Could Chechnya be used as a smokescreen?"

Ivanov then asked, "Could the anti-Russian campaign be unleashed for the purpose of driving Russia out from the Caucasus and later from Central Asia?"

What better justification for attacking the US/NATO than painting them as the ally of terrorists out to destroy Russia?

-- Nabi (nabi7@yahoo.com), December 15, 1999.



-- ioff (cle@n.upcrew), December 15, 1999.

I suppose you know a lot about Christianity, from a Jewish perspective though, isn't that right Nabi, a.k.a. "Mr. Brian Huie"? Why don't you tell everyone the real source of your brilliant prediction that we would be attacked Dec. 10. You put more faith in the words of your dear traitor friend Mr. J.R. Nyquist than you do in any bible. I know what your motive is too you scum sucking communist. You hope to put these Christians in such a state of fear and confusion that Christianity will be weakened so that the Jewish can dominate the world. I wonder how your FEDERAL employers would view the type of activity you've been engaging in. Or are they paying you to do this?

-- Hawk (flyin@high.again), December 15, 1999.

Antoinette, you do have great insight, and I think several who responded to you negatively may have missed your point - at least, I think what you were pointing out is that way too many of us who call ourselves Christians don't at all act like we're just "strangers in a strange land," passing through to our home on the other side. We are so busy gathering and protecting all we can of what we can't take with us that we are very difficult to distinguish from the rest of the world. Reminds me of the story of the fellow who visited a well-known Christian teacher at his home, and was startled to discover the teacher had only a bed, his books on a small table and chair, some elementary cooking utensils and stove in his simple room. When he asked why the teacher didn't live in a lovely home with all the trappings befitting his famous status, the teacher asked the visiting traveler where his fancy furniture, library, clothing, etc. were...and the traveler exclaimed that he was just visiting and of course all his belongings were at his home. To which the teacher responded, there's your answer - I'm not home yet!

So Antoinette, I think you're right on by questioning us Christians as to why we act so afraid when God tells us as he told the original Israeli nation (Joshua 1:9) to be strong and of good courage, and to not fear what man can do to us (Matthew 10:28). We shouldn't be afraid of whatever Russia and all the rest of the "evil empire" is plotting, because it is all in God's perfect plan. We need to be about our Father's business, which is letting folks know what our hope is, and Who it is that we look to for salvation and eternal life. We are called to be wise as serpents and harmless as doves, always ready to give an answer for the hope that is in us, so I've prepared as best I can to care for my family in case Y2K or war or natural disaster comes our way, but I'm not afraid - and when fear starts to build, I re-focus on God's perfect love, which casts out all fear. Blessings!

-- sonshine (mjent@breeze.net), December 15, 1999.


Good Evening all!

Hawk: such anger coming out of you is not a sign of a Christian. Read Romans 12. How you came to the conclusion that Mr. Nyquist is a traitor is beyond me...please explain your position before you compromise what's left of your credibility.

-- (Kurt.Borzel@gems8.gov.bc.ca), December 15, 1999.


Kurt,

God did not put us on this planet to encourage fear of our fellow man, but rather to demonstrate that true strength comes from love, so that our children may follow our example, and have no need to live in fear. Whether Nyquist intends to serve Russia or the United States is not important, the bottom line is that he attacks the human spirit with fear. Actions speak louder than words, and there is no meaningful purpose for his actions. I consider him to be a traitor to humanity in general.

-- Hawk (flyin@high.again), December 16, 1999.


All your comments were interesting reading. I have just read "The Creature from Jekyll Island" by G. Edward Griffin. If you think you have a nuclear threat, and facts show themselves to be looking that way, than if you have educated yourself about the financial situation in the world, you understand that there is Trouble brewing. The financial threat is completely and utterly easy to miss, and as someone mentioned many of us seems to have the attitude of "see no evil" "speak no evil" "hear no evil"....when you start seeing the facts its inescapable. Switzerland is off the gold standand...since July 1999. This was the last bastion of hold out from the old guard. That was the last nail in the coffin. Tell me, does anyone know what any countries dollar is REALLY worth? Comments are welcome. Please email me directly.

-- Vol Enteer (Waxhwdpatt@aol.com), December 16, 1999.

HEY HAWK. Think this guy would appreciate your cockamamy theories about not fearing wild beast? Or maybe he could used a little healthy dose of fear to take preventative action which would have saved his life?

Teenager ripped to death by 12 lions By Nigel Rosser An old Harrovian aged 19 was torn to pieces by lions in Zimbabwe after ignoring one of the cardinal rules of his camp and sleeping with his tent open, an inquest heard today.

David Pleydell-Bouverie, whose father is Sheriff of Hertfordshire and grandfather was the seventh Earl of Radnor, died in one or two minutes after the attack by a pride of around 12 lions. Other safari members heard a scream - suddenly cut short - and saw Mr Pleydell- Bouverie run from his tent into the bush before he was surrounded and set upon.

The heir to a 2,000-acre estate near Luton had been in Africa after leaving Harrow on a gap year before going to university. A fellow member of the camp, David Boyle, who was with his wife and two children, said in a statement: "I heard a long yell call out. I didn't know if it was human or animal. It was long and loud and suddenly cut off. The yell was followed by the prolonged sound of growling of animals which I assumed was lions." End snip.

I didn't go looking for this just to make you look like the idiot you are, it was on Drudges wegbsite , breaking news. The Lord do work in mysterious ways don't he?

-- Nikoli Krushev (doomsday@y2000.com), December 16, 1999.


You are an imbecile Nikoli. I used the analogy of a bear because a previous poster had referred to Russia as "the bear."

Human beings are not animals, but I guess as you wake up every morning and look in the mirror that reality just becomes more and more difficult for you to fathom.

He who lives by the sword shall die by the sword!

-- Hawk (flyin@high.again), December 16, 1999.


I hope you have all dug yourself a really big hole to hide in!

-- Eric The Red (erh11@yahoo.com), December 16, 1999.

No thanks Eric, I don't hide in a hole like some of the rats around here that have been infesting our country recently. I stand like a man and face the music, which is what you are also going to have to do if you dare to tangle with the greatest nation in the world.

-- Hawk (flyin@high.again), December 16, 1999.

Fear is the anti-thesis to Love. Just to be clear, hate is the outcome of an irrational or unconscious fear. Hate is a learned behavior. Fear is automatic!

It is a reaction to entrapment in a cognitive dilemna based upon indecision between flight or fight in a threatening situation.

The way out - is possession of self-awareness AND self-knowledge combined with a thorough knowledge of the environment that is being entered and the conditions of that environment. When those external conditions are unknown ... presumptions as to the 'probable' becomes the rule of thumb.

A person fears what he/she does not understand, it exists outside their realm of awareness or experience. Hence, the continous drills and wargames that a soldier endures BEFORE they are sent onto a battlefield. One they arrive, they know who they are, what they are, what they are supposed to do and how they are to do it. Awareness present, there is no fear - mental distress in the form of anxiety and apprehension perhaps, but not true fear. Cognitive mechanisms are in place to allow freedom of action in response to the dynamic environment. Intuitive and autonomous reactions are engaged.

If one enters the wilderness and encounters an animal with the propensity to take their life ... a fear based reaction will ensure that individuals demise. the animal smells the fear, it is discernable, even subconsciously to other humans. (BTW: This is one of the means by which street-gangs and thugs target individuals.)

However, knowledge of the potentialities of the encounter coupled with a heavy dose of respect for the capabilities of the 'threat' will in most cases result in one of two situations ... one the individual will not increase the risk to themself by needless esposure (example the story cited above) OR if an encounter is met, there is a measurably increased probability of survival. in many cases the animal - whether it be 4-legged or 2-legged - will move on to 'easier' prey.

-- hiding in plain (sight@edge. of no-where), December 16, 1999.


Sounds like you are all doing just what the Executive levels of any government who wants total control would have you do, you have divided yourselves, "divide and conquer". I only hope that you have taken the time before all this bickering to prepare yourselves and your families for what may come. I do not feel that the threat is so much from a nuclear missile as it is from our own government itself. In any instance it's useless to argue, the path is already set, and we shall see what we see. Good luck and God save us all.

-- (badger07@hotmail.com), December 23, 1999.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ