|Submited on :||Sun, 8th of Jul 2018 - 12:23:53 PM|
|Post ID :||8wz2f9|
|Post Name :||t3_8wz2f9|
|Post Type :||link|
|Subreddit Type :||public|
|Subreddit ID :||t5_2qhnn|
Full-scale trade war looms closer
The Nationalist Internationale Is Crumbling
NYT: How China Got Sri Lanka to Cough Up a Port
Russian Electoral Intervention: Strategic Genius or Something Else? - Dan Nexon argues that Moscow’s decision to back Trump was a risky gamble. Even though Trump managed to win and is damaging American power, leadership, and influence, this may very well harm Russia's interests in the long-term.
The only use for the weapon is hard to counter strategic second strike weapon. It could be used after Russia has been destroyed in a nuclear war.
This is very similar to the doomsday weapon in the movie Dr. Strangelove. Instead of "cobalt-thorium G" as in the movie, they use sodium in the seawater to spike the bomb. Sodium absorbs extra neutron to it's nucleus and becomes sodium-24. Sodium-24 is very intensively radioactive with 15-hour half-life. Decay creates an electron and two gamma rays.
When the bomb explodes underwater at correct depth, radioactive sea spray causes massive contamination over large areas. Only small number of torpedoes are needed to destroy coastal areas in the US. Two thirds of the US population lives within 100 miles from the coast.
I see this as a way for Russia to maintain credible deterrence with all the maintenance and development problems they have with their submarines and SLBM's. Doomsday torpedo is easier to maintain and secure than decaying submarine fleet.
I see this as a way for Russia to maintain credible deterrence with all the maintenance and development problems they have with their submarines and SLBM's.
Plus gives flashy scary PR (as the article notes it was leaked "accidentally-on-purpose"), all out of cheaply building something out of the 1960s.
Interestingly missed in all the hoopla was the fact lots of countries Russia has issues with have primarily seaside populations - China, Japan, etc. It may be useful as a second-strike weapon against the US but it's a terrifying abstract threat against countries that can't really defend against it.
Russia doesn't have issues with China. They resolved their border dispute long time ago.
SS: Russia is building a drone submarine to deliver large-scale nuclear weapons against U.S. harbors and coastal cities, according to Pentagon officials.
The developmental unmanned underwater vehicle, or UUV, when deployed, will be equipped with megaton-class warheads capable of blowing up key ports used by U.S. nuclear missile submarines, such as Kings Bay, Ga., and Puget Sound in Washington state.
The weapon is designed to strike coastal cities and strategic targets, e.g. New York, Boston, Los Angeles, San Francisco and bases like Groton CT and San Diego.
The warhead is reported as a 100 megatons (which is credible) nuclear device with a ‘dirty’ shell (reportedly Cobalt, but likely Uranium) to maximize the radioactive fallout. The payload is similar to the warheads used in ICBMs (Inter-continental Ballistic Missile) but only one is carried on the torpedo. It could therefore be compared to a city being hit by a single MIRV (Multiple Independent Reentry Vehicle) except that it explodes under or on the surface of the water.
The effect is likely to be much more localized than an air-burst, but with greater local contamination spread by a radioactive ‘rain’. The explosion itself may be some way out of the target city due to geography and obstacle defenses but a shoreline city like New York would wiped out by a single hit.
Wait, so this torpedo is twice as powerful as the Tzar Bomb?
Yes. It's not difficult to create massive yield if the diameter limit for the primary and the weight for the warhead is relaxed. Tzar Bomba was 7ft in diameter, Kanyon is 5ft. If they design new warhead for the weapon 100 Mt is reasonable estimate.
Tzar Bomba design had maximum yield 100 Mt, but the yield was limited to 50 Mt because the fallout across the Europe could have been too large. They used lead tamper to limit the yield. The purpose of Kanyon is maximum fallout across continent. Underwater explosion increases the fallout even more.
The largest warhead currently in US the arsenal is < 500 kt (W88), Single Kanyon-torpedo would be roughly tnt-equivalent to whole Ohio-class submarine and the cost and maintenance will be small fraction of it.
500 kt (W88)
Tbh at that point it really doesn't matter if it's 500kt or 5mt bomb, once it goes off you and everyone nearby are no longer in the physical realm
So does a ton of TNT if you are standing right next to it. A 500kT has a significantly smaller blast radius than a 5MT bomb so makes it a difference. It is the difference between Manhattan being destroyed and New York City being destroyed.
Practically speaking it is still going to be devastating
I think it matters for radius and mushroom size.
Great, now it’s America’s turn to come up with something better.
Not sure “better” is the right word.
Russia is desperate because of its current disastrous situation - military and economical. They try to divert the attention from it by showing off with "new" and "powerful" weapons that work "Russian stile"=never works. They do it also with lame tactics of poisoning people. Think about it, weak states like North Korea do this often, poison people, breag about their nukes etc. Russia will implode soon with zero casualties.
Remind me when Russia implodes. Neither the economy and especially not the military are in a disastrous situation. False statements are not good to begin a discussion on a geopolitics sub.
They imploded in the 90s - bankrupt via defaulting. They nearly went to critical levels recently when they went to 3 year recession and their rainy day fund consists of billions burnt so fast they nearly ran out.
People here dont seem to realised how lucky Russia was during the recent oil glut.
Remind me when Russia implodes.
This is the USSR, not modern Russia.
That was 1991, 27 years ago. Not a distant past.
Wait, you said in your first comment, that Russia will implode soon with zero casualties. And now you are talking about the collapse of the Soviet union. This is clearly not the same isn't it?
Not the same user. I just wanted to highlight how close was the collapse of USSR to our time.
And I do not think that Russia will implode in the midterm. They are using current high oil prices to rebuild their national reserves in case of another crisis (such as oil prices falling in the range of $30 - $40).
It's not just about oil prices. Russia isn't a pure oil economy like the gulf countries. They have a high production of agriculture, they build their own trains, cars, planes, rocket, they build nuclear reactors all over their world, have a pretty stable industry all in all and also other sectors like IT or tourism at growing. Though Russias economy is small compared to its size and potential, they are rather self sufficient (this wad also a reason why the sanctions hadn't a big effect).
I still see Russia as a raw materials exporter, because oil, gas and it's derivates are over 50% of Russian exports. Yes, Russia produces cars but they are not competitive in the international market, and the local production survive because of tariffs. In agriculture, Russian soils are not of much quality, because of it they have to do extensive agriculture. And their transport costs are very high. Other countries with higher salaries (ex:France) can sell cheaper products than Russia because of its low transport cost. The country still has a long way to go. About IT, take into account that several countries in Eastern Europe are going down the IT software specialization road such of Bulgaria, so the competition is going to be tough.
Speaking to the choir here. But their budget is so dependent on oil prices. That's what a petro-state is.
Sure, no prbl. Around 1990 they broke down in disarray, torn apart and split in "million pieces". Do you remember the Iron courtin? Then, we did not have any info on how bad they were, now you have a lot of info, and I am not talking about their lame and basically retarted propaganda, and still believe that they have control on anything? History tends to repet itself when you make the same mistake again and now it will be sooner. You have to be really stupid-Russia's strategy- to believe that doing the same thing that proved to be wrong, you will succed!
Sorry but you seem to live in a bubble. The actual Russian policy has nothing to do with the Soviet union. Also such statements like "how bad they are" mean nothing. You seem to have no information on this topic. But you can continue the wishfull thinking of "soon Russia will fall apart"
Both Soyuz and the VVER-1200 would like a word with your tired 'broken Russian shit' trope.
Also they've been outperforming German economic growth since around June 2017. Certainly they had some pretty huge setbacks with the whole oil dive but they're not on a trend towards collapse but a trend towards stabilization.
outperforming German economic growth
comparing growth rates that way only makes sense if the economies are similarly developed. And even then, you're conventiently ignoring that Russia outperformed Germany only in summer 2017, not "since". It's significantly lower than germany so far this year, for example, not to mention before the summer.
Russia's economy is stagnating, but what's more important is the long-term forecast due to the structural issues looming at the horizon that aren't being adressed at all.
So, exactly like Germany which has some pretty huge structural issues in the shape of the EU and euro.
Also it is since, check the numbers on the bar graph, Russia's lowest is 0.9% growth where Germany ran around 0.6-0.7% before hitting a low of 0.3%.
To be clear I'm not saying Germany is doomed or Russia is in great shape. Just that the tendency to read every misfortune about our geopolitical enemies as leading to their doom is foolish and hypocritical and only helps blind us to reality.
Are you a comediant and make a stand up comedy on Russia's GDP related to Germany? Please, read and understand what GDP means and how it reflects a state' s (economical) power!
We're talking about economic trends and the GDP trend of Russia over the past year is similar if not better then German GDP trend. GDP at least seems to disprove the doom and gloom story being told about Russia. Certainly this doesn't suggest Russia's doing great just not as bad as some would like to imagine.
Forgot the difference between growth and total GDP there?
No. Only looking at 2017 growth is cherrypicking data.
The initial comment was that Russia was headed towards some sort of disaster due to economic issues. Growth is an indicator or trends and the Russian trend is as strong/weak as the German one even while total GDP favors Germany.
You don't disprove that by linking to some cherrypicked data. The Russian economy has been in a very bad shape since at least 20 years. The Russian economy had been shrinking before 2017 due to sanctions. Their GDP hasn't even rebounded from that. Russia also doesn't really produce anything economically. The vast majority of their exports are raw materials - oil, gas, various metals and foodstuffs. Exports shrank from $506B in 2011 to $269B in 2016. Moreover the value of their currency has dropped dramatically. It's not an overstatement that Russia's economy is already disastrous.
But this is the problem with the anti-Russian hawks such as yourself, you can't argue that Russia is a credible threat to the US, Europe and the world and then laugh about how poor and worthless Russia is at the same time. If Russia really is so poor then the reality is that they are not a threat to NATO and thus no more NATO spending needs to happen.
North Korea is a credible threat and is in a much worse position than Russia.