OT- Reuters-Russis lowers its threshold for nukes

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

"Russia, for objective reasons, is forced to lower the threshold for using nuclear weapons,extend the nuclear deterrent to smaller-scale conflicts, and openly warn potential opponents about this" stated Vladimir Yakolev-the chief of the missile program.......hhhmmmmm....they're not doing too well in Chechnya....could this be a warning? What are your thoughts?

-- Annie (nanc@fiberia.com), December 18, 1999

Answers

my thought is ...
oh shit

-- Dan G (thepcguru@hotmail.com), December 18, 1999.

Link?

This is bad.

Does anyone here remember a pre-holocoaust prediction that the Dragon would align with the Bear?

Was it Nostrodamus? Cayce? Biblical?

Thanks in advance.

rw

-- rw (RidleyWalker@aol.com), December 18, 1999.


Am not proficient with the computer, but the article was on the front page of the Boston Globe, 12/18/99, written by Martin Nesirsky of Reuters.............I don't like the sound of this at all!!!!!!!!!!

-- Annie (nanc@fiberia.com), December 18, 1999.

What the hell are the Russkie's up to now???? And where is Klintoon responding..........?????????? If US had threatened tactical nukes on Serbia, can you imagine the Russian backlash?

-- Steve C (Steve56@Excitemail.com), December 18, 1999.

Here is a link to the story:

Nuclear might celebrated with a Russian warning

-- Linkboy (Link@here.itis), December 18, 1999.



Annie,

This is just a reaction by a corrupted government ruled by a old drunk who is basically saying "Dont nobody f-ck with us right now !"

Boris Nikolayevich has a full plate right now and is scared and this is a good way to show he doesn't want any nonsense from the rest of the world. He is not stupid enough to use the bombs, Russia knows nobody wins with a nuclear war.

-- hamster (hamster@mycage.com), December 18, 1999.


On the contrary, Russia's entire military doctrine is based on the winability of a nuclear war.

-- Ron Schwarz (rs@clubvb.com.delete.this), December 18, 1999.

Ron,

The facts have not changed, if the US and Russia get into a nuclear war it will last minutes and there will be no winner.

Thank you and goodnight...

-- hamster (hamster@mycage.com), December 18, 1999.


Hamster, Your view on who wins or loses a nuclear exchange is irrelevant. Russian military doctrine has always been based on the idea of being able to win. You remind me of a friend who opposed SDI because we couldn't stop all the missles and he "didn't want to live in the kind of world that would be left."

This is about as scary a time since the Cuba crisis.

-- michael frazier (mfrazier@pacific.net), December 18, 1999.


rw: Rev chapter 12 and 13 both refer to a dragon. 12 is where the dragon in the sky swishes his tail and a third of the stars fal. Here is 12, with a bear referenced:

Rv:13:1: And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy. Rv:13:2: And the beast which I saw was like unto a leopard, and his feet were as the feet of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion: and the dragon gave him his power, and his seat, and great authority. Rv:13:3: And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the beast. Rv:13:4: And they worshipped the dragon which gave power unto the beast: and they worshipped the beast, saying, Who is like unto the beast? who is able to make war with him? Rv:13:5: And there was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies; and power was given unto him to continue forty and two months. Rv:13:6: And he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven. Rv:13:7: And it was given unto him to make war with the saints, and to overcome them: and power was given him over all kindreds, and tongues, and nations. Rv:13:8: And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world. Rv:13:9: If any man have an ear, let him hear. Rv:13:10: He that leadeth into captivity shall go into captivity: he that killeth with the sword must be killed with the sword. Here is the patience and the faith of the saints. Rv:13:11: And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth; and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spake as a dragon. Rv:13:12: And he exerciseth all the power of the first beast before him, and causeth the earth and them which dwell therein to worship the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed. Rv:13:13: And he doeth great wonders, so that he maketh fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men, Rv:13:14: And deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast; saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast, which had the wound by a sword, and did live. Rv:13:15: And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed. Rv:13:16: And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads: Rv:13:17: And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name. Rv:13:18: Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six. (KJV)

-- Hokie (va@va.com), December 18, 1999.



" Russian military doctrine has always been based on the idea of being able to win"

Michael,

What if the only solution is not to play the game? Stop thinking inside the box. Russians are not stupid.

-- hamster (hamster@mycage.com), December 18, 1999.


Cartoon:

Remember the old FARSIDE with generals sitting around a table, and someone poses the question:

"What would happen if we threw a war, and NObody came?"

Heh, I will be under my bed.

-- Hokie (va@va.com), December 18, 1999.


We face a future less promising than ten years ago!! 10 years ago, we could have recouped our global supremacy and provided the stability the world needed for a Pax Americana! Instead we face a situation of parity in the world. Any major power can now alter the entire global landscape! Irregardless of what Russia does, I see that America will diminish in global influence and supremacy in the coming months. Soon, we will need to be very cautious as to where our ships may travel. Soon, we will need to consider the risks of venturing too far from our own shores. America was great as long as her citizens recognized the DAILY costs of LIBERTY!! SOON, we will relearn the fact that liberty is not free or automatic!! SOON, we will decide if we want to pay the price to continue as a free nation!! If you have a young son as I do, you will have to ask yourself if freedom is worth "his"life. Never forget our legacy!!! MANY PATRIOTS have bled and died so we could buy SUV'S!!!!!!! This makes me want to PUKE! SOON!, we will decide if America is worth fighting for. Please think about this!!!

(He Who) Rolls with Punches

-- (He Who)Rolls with Punches (JoeZi@aol.com), December 18, 1999.


Maybe they give us this warning because they intend an extremely limited nuke assault on Chechnya to sterilize the region ? They can use nuke artillary with limited collateral damage, unless it triggers a global response.

I think they intend to NOT lose another engagement with the Chechans and risk losing more face (as if limited nukes wouldn't cause this). Also, they have to contain this or run the risk of further dissolution by other factions. Just a thought.

-- Rob (maxovrdrv51@hotmail.com), December 18, 1999.


Rob is on the right track. They are warning the west not to interfere with Chechnya and laying the groundwork for local nukes there. This is not aimed at us directly -- in fact, they would be more likely NOT to announce this if they were planning imminent first-strike actions against west. That hardly makes this comforting. They are as much as admitting what Nyquist and others have said, namely, that their military is now heavily dependent on their nuclear force for any "success" or, at least, big-time threat.

-- BigDog (BigDog@duffer.com), December 18, 1999.


Tactical nukes for a internal problem?

This would be the stupidest move Yeltsin could ever make. The economic and diplomatic repercussions of such an action arent even measurable on any scale.

Between the immediate carnage, the lingering fallout and the post-conflict analysis of how the problem could have been resolved with conventional weapons would make Russia a pariah to the world, would remove Yeltsin from office and would start an anti-government uprising that would build to a point of collapse of what exists as the Russian government.

-- hamster (hamster@mycage.com), December 18, 1999.


...Reminds me of Hitler "practicing" in Spain before starting World War II.

JJ

-- Jeremiah Jetson (laterthan@uthink.y2k), December 18, 1999.


Back a starving, desolate and life threatened man in the corner and figure why he becomes erratic. If it means the very survival of that nation, I highly imagine it is a viable option to them. They will deal with the political fallout after they get things contained. Just another thought.

-- Rob (maxovrdrv51@hotmail.com), December 18, 1999.

Besides, we did it in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

-- Rob (maxovrdrv51@hotmail.com), December 18, 1999.

I think we are seeing the early stages of the destruction of Russia as planned by the New World Order elite. They are probably going to use a small nuke on Chechnya, and then NATO will have an excuse to annihilate them so that the NWO won't have to deal with any more of this communist crap throwing a monkey wrench into their plans. We're also going to be hitting Iraq hard again, but it isn't clear at this time which will occur first.

-- Hawk (flyin@high.again), December 18, 1999.

"........NATO will have an excuse to annihilate them ......"

Hawk, what are you drinking? Pour me a glass.

NATO cant even clean up a tiny place like Kosovo, what are they going to do to Russia. More importantly HOW are they going to do it? Full blown nukes? Please.

-- hamster (hamster@mycage.com), December 18, 1999.


An eye for an eye... Russia uses a small nuke on Chechnya, and NATO will hammer them with lots of big ones just to make sure it doesn't happen again. They would claim that they were justified as always, in the interest of "preserving peace." Think it won't happen? Just watch. The NWO does not let obstacles stop them from accomplishing their agenda, so Russia will either be assimilated, or it will be eliminated.

-- Hawk (flyin@high.again), December 18, 1999.

Hamster, The millions of dead in the wars of this century alone tells me that MOST leaders of nations, our own included, are truly stupid indeed, and can be counted on to act so when the military is involved.

Michael

Airborne all the way, Rangers lead the way.

-- michael frazier (mfrazier@pacific.net), December 18, 1999.


If other posts are correct; the warning for civilians to leave the capital would indicate a nuclear tactial strike by Xmas or New Years to set an example to all others. Remember Russia lost 20 plus MILLION people in WWII for the "Mother Land". The " Alcoholic" and the "Hard Liners" have their backs in the cornor. The republic would become rock solid if nukes were used cause every psycho separatist with ambition would think twice about causing trouble and everyone would fall in line. The window of opportunity for PAX AMERICANA of the last ten years has been lost to SUV's. Reminicenses of the Berlin Wall coming down...A politicial commentator was commenting that a period of world stability was ending because we had two powerful nations prepared to police the world and use a BIG STICK to ENFORCE there position if they weren't respected. This is were the "Drunk" and the "Generals" and the "Family" or whomever is in control says it's enough;.....time to kick ass! Everyone would come to attention; India and Pakistan, China, NATO, U.S.A. Russia could say; we; like the Americans have and are prepared to Nuke anyone who doesn't respect the power that be; including your New World Order. Put Up and Shut Up or lets Tango; whats your decision. I don't think we've (collectively) got the guts unless we're personally attacked. Who wants to send their son to Chechnya. God help us all.

-- Charles Park (chaspark@ccinet.ab.ca), December 19, 1999.

It's a done deal, the future has already been written. Russia will either be assimilated, or eliminated.

-- Hawk (flyin@high.again), December 19, 1999.

As far as 'survivability' of nukes....something I got a bit further down the thread...

EventHoriz@n.com), December 19, 1999.


Well, half my post was placed....here's the addy for the link... http://nwss.entrewave.com/view/nwss/

It's 3AM...too tired to hyperlink it so copy/paste...

-- Satanta (satanta@zmail.com), December 19, 1999.


Hawk,

IMHO, you are correct about the multi-nationals and their plans for Russia. I also believe they may have under-estimated the Russian military, but not Russia's current leader. I think it highly unlikely that NATO will use nukes, but that Russia might. If this desparate action should come to pass, the spin from both sides should be quite revealing.

I have been concerned about the Russian ultimatum for civies to vacate the premises.

Wondering,

-- Uhhmm... (JFCP81A@aol.com), December 19, 1999.


I say again, One tactical nuke, Grozny ceases to be a problem. And everyone is afraid of them again.

-- Squid (ItsDark@down.here), December 19, 1999.

I continue to see this as threat-based more than decision-based (ie, as though a decision has been taken). However, if Russia were to do this, rollover or near-rollover will be ideal. The west is unlikely to want to raise the ante to the needed level with Y2K already a wild card. Also, to be blunt, there really isn't much that can be done. Nuking Russia ISN'T going to happen.

Conventional forces won't be sent in. The only sanctions that will work are long-term and even those won't affect Russia too greatly.

The real bottom line is that Russia can't afford to lose in Grozny. Period. They must win to sustain the government. Personally, I think they are a lot more focused on that than anything having to do with NATO or U.S. (as would we be in a similar situation), PROVIDING the west butts out of "their business."

-- BigDog (BigDog@duffer.com), December 19, 1999.


(OT) Moscow Says It Will Use Nukes in Local War

-- $#!+ ($#!+@$#!+.$#!+), December 19, 1999.

We enter the most likely window of opportunity for a strike tomorrow. Let us all pray the Russians and Chinese are just posturing and not setting us up for nuclear anhiliation.

-- Nikoli Krushev (doomsday@y2000.com), December 20, 1999.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ