Thanks for the fluff…

Micheal Kofman’s background is this…

‘… Mr. Kofman holds a M.A. in International Security from the Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service, Georgetown University and a B.A. in Political Science from Northeastern University…’

We note here that Kofman does not hold any kind of hard science degree whatsoever…either physics, math or engineering…

Ie he is a layman when it comes to technical matters…

For those interested in an actual science discussion…I suggest a quick look at my comments here…

http://www.unz.com/tsaker/newly-revealed-russian-weapons-systems-political-implications/#comment-2236917

http://www.unz.com/article/the-implications-of-russias-new-weapons/#comment-2231362

http://www.unz.com/article/the-implications-of-russias-new-weapons/#comment-2231669

http://www.unz.com/article/the-implications-of-russias-new-weapons/#comment-2234349

it’s pretty clear the banking mafia are at least considering taking out both Russia and the USA as part of their move to China.

It’s pretty clear you haven’t been taking your thioridizine.

Of course they are immoral. Actually immoral were the people who made first the bomb, used it and intended to use it in future conflicts, convinced that nobody else would make a nuclear bomb. No doubt that the guilt lays at USA feet.
Building the atom bomb by the Russians was moral because it cooled the heads of the warmongers.
To get rid of the nuclear weapons one should first get rid of the people intent to use them, and these people are, as it turned out, the same Americans playing God who used them in the first place. And there is little chance to do it if they won’t be convinced that they won’t live to see their ‘victory’, let alone to enjoy it.

That’s a good point, but I don’t think it’s that easy. Some who have done estimates and projections don’t think much of humanity will survive due to unintended consequences on food sources:

Peace.

Sure, that seems to be Daesh’s calling card. Pretty nice they don’t have a state anymore.

I’d like to get your thoughts on the morality of using nuclear weapons. First strike? Retaliatory? Should we attempt, as collective humanity, to get rid of them?

@you can kiss Christianity goodbye

Adopt Islam, they just cut throats and burn alive people individually.

You don’t win in a nuclear exchange – it is pure scorched earth.

depends who the “you” is – if someone wanted to take out *both* Russia and the USA and believed they personally would survive (and even be better off) then they might see that as winning.

it’s pretty clear the banking mafia are at least considering taking out both Russia and the USA as part of their move to China.

although that would imply the simplest and most effective wunderwaffe would be one that took out the ability of the banking mafia to start a war.

More facts for the wishful thinker:

http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/Space_Ukrainian_style_Through_Crisis_to_Revival_999.html

One might think that the global crisis and the series of financial losses over the past three years would have driven the final nails into the coffin of Ukraine’s space industry. Yet there was no crash.

Ukraine still has its ERS and Navigation Field Data Receiving Centre. Dniprocosmos, the Dnipro branch of NCSFCT is also still operating, developing software for the flight control centres and ERS data processing, as is the Zahidny Radar Servicing Centre for the space tracking station.

The industry was in need of a complete “reset” and actively mobilized in search of new sales markets and opportunities for business diversification. And they found them. Ukrainian companies have begun manufacturing the first stage of the Antares carrier-rocket for the US company Orbital ATK.
Jointly with the European and Italian space agencies the Yuzhnoye design office is working on the RD-843 main propulsion systems for the fourth stage of the Vega carrier-rocket. And in 2016, a new 5-year collaboration plan was signed with China, in which Ukraine’s share in joint projects increased by 40% compared to the previous year.

Negotiations are underway with Poland and Lithuania as well. These countries do not yet have a serious aerospace background, but in conjunction with Ukraine they aim to make substantial progress in this area. Next up is cooperation with South Korea, India, China and Spain. The industry’s proactive stance has already produced results, with production and product sales up 47% and 40%, respectively, in the first half of 2016, compared to the same period of 2015 (data from the State Space Agency of Ukraine).

You’re talking about some future project, which may or may not pan out

Maybe, but it’s a serious project described in non-Ukrainian news sources too:

http://www.russianspaceweb.com/canso.html

It’s the very definition of wishful thinking

Well, you dismiss particiaption in Euroepan, Russian and American space programs as “scraps” and assume that this project won’t go through. It seems like your thinking is less objective.

Ukraine’s contract for supplying engines for Europe’s Vega rockets has been renewed until 2020:

https://uawire.org/ukrainian-contract-with-europe-on-supply-of-engines-for-vega-rockets-extended-till-2020#

The Ukrainian National Industrial Portal announced on Monday, January 8 that the Yuzhnoye Design Bureau, the Yuzhmash plant and the Italian company Avio SPA signed an agreement to continue the Vega project.

The contract for the delivery of sustainer engines for 4th-stage Vega RD-868P carrier rockets has been extended till 2020. Under the contract, Yuzhnoye Design Bureau and Yuzhmash enterprises will manufacture and supply twenty more RD-868P engines

The original contract was signed in February 2004 and allowed Yuzhnoye to develop a VG-143 sustainer engine that is part of the liquid propulsion system of the carrier rocket’s booster block. It is designed to create thrust, control the thrust vector, maneuver the upper stage, and withdraw the upper stage from orbit.

The Vega carrier rocket was developed by European Space Agency together with the Italian Space Agency. It is designed for launching 1,200 kg satellites into solar-synchronous orbit at 1,200 km or satellites weighing 1,500 kg to a polar orbit with a height of 700 km.

::::::::

Not true facts, wishful thinker?

So again, the facts suggest not dissapearance as wishful thinkers would like, but ongoing existence at a lower level than in the 1980s but still stable. Enough to support these military projects.

Proposed Canso rocket site hopes to eventually reach 12 launches per year

You’re talking about some future project, which may or may not pan out, and the Ukraine may or may not be a part of it. It’s the very definition of wishful thinking.

Aerospace industry in the Ukraine is thus reduced to pining for scraps. They are offering “parts” to somebody else’s rockets.

They are building engines for rockets used by others.

Canada will be launching entire rockets:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/canso-spaceport-launch-outline-1.4431692

“With a launch date of 2020, and 18 months of construction and six months of commissioning, you can see where we’ve got to get to groundbreaking. So this is an important and key time for us,” said the executive, who represents a consortium of three U.S.-based space firms.

He presented rocket designers and executives from Ukrainian-based Yuzhnoye Design with a case of Rocket Lager craft beer — recently created in Guysborough County by a craft brewer and featuring an astronaut on its label.

Maksym Degtiarov, a rocket design executive with Yuzhnoye State Design Office, was on hand for the news conference to say the Ukrainian firm is prepared to ramp up its production of Cyclone-4M medium-lift rockets to supply the site.

“We expect it to happen up to 12 times a year. From six to 12 times a year,” he said. Matier added the firm is capable of producing one of the rockets about every 29 days.

:::::::::::

So, wishful thnker, while the scale of the industry will be reduced from Soviet times, it is growth from a few years ago, and enough to keep going. This would probably explain the new hires.

If you’re talking about this:

The Russian Zenit-2SB rocket carrying Angosat to orbit was supplied by Ukrainian maker Yuzhmash, making the launch a rare joint project between the two countries since 2014

The part highlighted in bold is the operative one. It is obvious that cooperation with Russia can no longer provide a consistent revenue stream for Ukraine as did prior to 2014. Aerospace industry in the Ukraine is thus reduced to pining for scraps. They are offering “parts” to somebody else’s rockets.

In this light it’s not at all clear to me why would they need to hire new employees – are these people going to work for free? This part definitely sounds like BS to me.

Were the facts I pasted wrong or not, wishful thinker?

Facts being:

The Russian Zenit-2SB rocket carrying Angosat to orbit was supplied by Ukrainian maker Yuzhmash, making the launch a rare joint project between the two countries since 2014

Yuzhnoye has hired 500 new employees, including 200-250 straight out of Dnipro’s engineering schools

Already this year there have been two successful launches of the European Space Agency’s Vega rocket, which included parts designed by Yuzhnoye and made by Yuzhmash

An Antares rocket designed and built in partnership with American aerospace manufacturer Orbital ATK is set to launch before 2018 to resupply the International Space Station

:::::::::

So are those facts, or are they not?

Accuses me of wishful thinking.
Quotes American propaganda station and Ukrainian officials, who say things are “looking up”. Because these guys wouldn’t lie. Obviously.

All Soviet era military enterprises in the Ukraine are forbidden from cooperating with “agressor” country. That’s not a myth, but official regime’s policy.

https://phys.org/news/2017-12-russia-telecoms-satellite-angola.html

The Zenit-2SB rocket carrying Angosat to orbit was supplied by Ukrainian maker Yuzhmash, making the launch a rare joint project between the two countries since 2014, when Moscow annexed Ukraine’s Crimea peninsula.

The Angosat project was agreed by Russia and Angola in 2009 and includes the satellite, its launch, and on-ground infrastructure in a suburb of the capital Luanda.

The approximately $280-million project has been financed with a credit from Russia’s state banks.

::::::::::::::

So Russia has its engine, and Ukraine has financing to pursue weapons that may in 20 or so years serve as a deterrent to further aggression. Everyone wins.

I really think that Soviet-era entities like Antonov, Yuzhmash are destined to die – there is no place for them in Euro-oriented Ukraine

Maybe, but that seems like wishful thinking. Canada will now be using engines from Yuzhmash. More likely, ongoing existence at a smaller level.

https://www.rferl.org/a/ukraine-yuzhmash-north-korea-rocket-technology-report/28821134.html

In fact, Yuzhnoye and Yuzhmash officials say, things are looking up.

Sokolov says new contracts are helping to stabilize Yuzhmash. The company expects growth between 1.5 and 3 percent over the next year, according to Sokolov. Meanwhile, Yuzhnoye has hired 500 new employees, including 200-250 straight out of Dnipro’s engineering schools, over the past year, according to Mashchenko.

Already this year there have been two successful launches of the European Space Agency’s Vega rocket, which included parts designed by Yuzhnoye and made by Yuzhmash.

The companies are looking forward to at least one more rocket launch this year. An Antares rocket designed and built in partnership with American aerospace manufacturer Orbital ATK is set to launch before 2018 to resupply the International Space Station.

All Soviet era military enterprises in the Ukraine are forbidden from cooperating with “agressor” country. That’s not a myth, but official regime’s policy. It’s plausible that Russia keeps a large stock of Ukrainian engines, that were delivered prior to 2014, but there is no way for Yuzhmash to sell any new ones, unless they are selling them illicitly.

I really think that Soviet-era entities like Antonov, Yuzhmash are destined to die – there is no place for them in Euro-oriented Ukraine, but we should probably bomb them to be sure.

How do institutions like this survive without contracts with Russians?

Russia is still using their engines:

https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2017/12/zenit-rocket-angosat-1-launch/

And Canada is helping:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-scotia/canso-spaceport-launch-outline-1.4431692

Don’t believe fairytales that this has died.

Lol triggered abrahamic sister seller।।

The development of new hypersonic unmanned aerial vehicle is an ongoing process of search for new technological solutions.

The search shall go on, but what are the problems?

These projects are basically make-do work where taxpayer money is moved into state institutions to stem the braindrain / honour kickback promises / honour various quid-pro-quote regional or minsterial contracts. It’s not something that is meant to come up with the good stuff.

If Russia has found a way to take out the SSBNs, then it appears she now has first strike capability.

Everybody has first strike capability.

The trick is to not make it last strike capability.

(It would be of some interest to quip the SSBNs with the nuclear-powered ramjet, if such would prove not too unhealthy for the crew: you could launch from the deep south pacific or some other area, completely out of harm’s way. The problem with the SLAM is that it is untestable. Maybe a good occasion to start exploring atmosphere-rich planets like Venus with SLAMs?)

You are an idiot.

Good point about the speed but USA jamming is behind & lot of missiles fly subsonic until the last phase where it’s just about whether it can be shot down or not.

These missiles are fired in Salvos and there’s a limit to how many targets a Ciws can engage per second for example & also how many missiles it takes to intercept a faster target.

For example a standard subsonic Missile is targeted by 1 + 1 defensive missiles but you may need a few more for super or hyper sonic.

This is the important part,

Yuzhnoye State Design Office

How do institutions like this survive without contracts with Russians? I mean what is their source of revenue?

IMHO, it’s far more likely to shut down, than produce a hypersonic missile in 20 years.

Yea it feels like Jews trying to slither into RW cuz even if frankists made Leftism it doesn’t absolve Jews for cow slaughter, circumcision or mosaic distinction।।

are you planning to blow up this comments section???

LOL – yes, but only after I eat your children!!! Dun, dun, dunnnn!!!

The rest of your points were quite eloquent, I don’t think I could have put them better.

Yes, it seems human beings are hardwired to have a higher assumption about ourselves as far as being and purpose is concerned.

And it seems if you try to remove religion, certain impulses simply find other outlets:
“The demise of religion among American youth is greatly exaggerated. It turns out that America isn’t raising a new generation of unbelievers. Instead, rising in the heart of deep-blue America are the zealots of a new religious faith. They’re the intersectionals, they’re fully woke, and the heretics don’t stand a chance.”

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/03/intersectionality-the-dangerous-faith/

Peace.

You’re referring to Jehova’s Witnesses, right?

How did the Soviets manage to develop new weapons without corruption getting in the way?

What sort of Muslim are you (*begins foaming at the mouth*), and are you planning to blow up this comments section???

Seriously though, I’m a liberal Protestant (meaning i accept some enlightenment approaches to religion like higher biblical criticism), and from an objective perspective, when we strip away the doctrines, religion seems to be an orientation toward Being. It’s the response of a defined group of people to fundamental questions about life at an aesthetic, phenomenological, ritual, and pre-rational level. How do we relate as ‘beings-there’ (to use Heidegger’s term referring to the contingency of space and time) to that there is a what there is.

Atheists can tip their fedora all they want, but all they’re demonstrating is they’ve shut down an entire dimension of their existence.

You should tell this to our critics; people keep complaining that the Shariah is not liberal enough.

That would certainly take some pressure off of us to redefine our inheritance rules and such.

Peace.

That’s fine if that’s your angle, but then it’s Christian’s fault for letting it become that way. The issues are systemic – you cannot pass the buck perpetually and not take a level of responsibility.

Peace.

Religion has failed.

Liberalism is failing.

I am not so certain there is a difference between liberalism and religion.

Whoever said the U.S.A. is a Christian nation? That certainly is an odd notion. Every grownup knows whose nation it is.

If I agreed with you on the first point, I wouldn’t be Muslim. I’m actually fairly happy with religion as an institution on the whole. It has certain failures for sure – as does any human enterprise. Part of life I guess.

It’s all about the cup-half-full-or-half-empty perspective. I don’t expect this world to be Paradise any more than I expect a lizard to be a prize race horse.

Liberalism is failing.

Agreed, though it has brought certain good things – for instance, we all benefit from certain labor laws.

Peace.

While Sabbateans as Donmeh in Turkey may still have some political influence Frankists seemed to stopped practicing endogamy in 19 century. Nobody can ever point to Francis’s anymore so they point to Jews who came from families that never were Frankists. The point of being a Frankist is that might be a crypto Jew, say, practicing Catholicism and not being Jewish overtly. Stephen Wise, Justice Brandeis, Justice Frankfurter, and Jacob Schiff were Jews not Frankists. It is also said that Jacob Frank rest of his life lived near Frankfurt and allegedly had an influence on Rothschilds but even if so it means nothing because Rothschilds remained Jewish. If however somebody show that Catholic Church hierarchy had many Frankists then this would get my attention but I haven’t seen it.

I don’t know. I suspect few do.

Someone knows.

Surprise! Surprise! Surprise!

one of the biggest failures of religious leadership across the world

Religion has failed.

Liberalism is failing.

Michael Kofman, who does seem to know what he is talking about and has studied the Russian language literature, has a very comprehensive summary.

Waving your red cape in front of Vice Admiral Martyanov, you happy primitive you.

Indeed.

I expect that Mr. Putin was mostly talking to his domestic base, pumping up the patriotism. A secondary goal would be to remind the Western elites that Russia can destroy us and we can’t do anything about it (other than destroy Russia in return). Yes, I know, that should be obvious to anyone with half a brain. Which is possibly why Putin thinks that the Western elites need reminding…

On a more technical note, great speed in a missile that is going to hit a pre-programmed stationary target is surely useful. But in something that is going to try to hit a moving target like an aircraft carrier, maybe not so much, because electronic jamming etc. travels at the speed of light. A hypersonic system that misses is of little use. How well will Russian guidance systems fare against Western jamming systems and decoys etc.etc.? I have no idea. Probably nobody has any idea, and we won’t, until after the shooting (if any) starts.

Karlin, need you to check out these links especially the second:

https://therebbeblog.wordpress.com/2018/03/04/truth-about-islamic-immigration/

https://therebbeblog.wordpress.com/2017/09/04/the-sabbatean-frankist-paradigm-is-statistical-certainty/

Sabbatean-Frankist is the name of a heretical kike sect which the author shows disprotionately includes major Jewish Leftist figures from Judge Rabbi Stephen Wise to Marx & Freud।।

You don’t win in a nuclear exchange – it is pure scorched earth. Basically it is the equivalent of; since you are willing to murder all our babies, we will do the same to yours.

It’s worse than madness.

The amount of money that goes into this one-upmanship is incredible. This to me has been one of the biggest failures of religious leadership across the world – no one is innocent. The major religious leaders should have been talking to their flocks in order to make them realize how immoral the proposition is and to demand that their political leadership at least as hard as they have about building up these weapons, in getting rid of them. There is no reason we can’t come to a wide moral consensus on this issue.

The fact that this nuclear exchange is considered between two Christian nations is a failure on its own level. If it ever occurs, you can kiss Christianity goodbye – (not only will its major centers go up in smoke) it will have been a moral failure of epic proportions; what the Mongol Hordes did will be held up as morally virtuous.

Peace.

Purpose of investment in these projects (and MAD doctrines generally) is not to bring about nuclear war, but to raise the cost of it – to make it inconceivable. Counter-intuitive aim should be that nuclear war becomes less likely as a result.

Of course, I would agree with the general point, that we seem to be going through some kind of ‘phantom limb’ syndrome from Cold War times. There is nothing really so irreconcilable about America, that appears to deserve the level of deterrence. And certainly no-one on either side is interested in actual nuclear war. Current causality of situation are taxpayers/government budgets who have to fund over-spending on those projects, which might otherwise have gone into infrastructure, scientific research into curing cancer, etc.

Ukraine made video of proposed wunderwaffen first:

http://defence-blog.com/news/ukraine-develops-hypersonic-cruise-missile.html

The Yuzhnoye State Design Office is jointly developing with the State Space Agency of Ukraine the new hypersonic cruise missile.

The press-service of “Yuzhnoye” design bureau released video footage showing a new concept of high-altitude hypersonic unmanned aerial vehicles, includes the project of a hypersonic cruise missile.

The development of new hypersonic unmanned aerial vehicle is an ongoing process of search for new technological solutions. It was reported that, to date, “Yuzhnoye” develops the components of new hypersonic unmanned aerial vehicles and has been carrying out important work into high-temperature materials applicable to hypersonic unmanned aerial vehicles.

The new missile would constitute a maneuvering, high-altitude hypersonic cruise missile. The missile will be equipped with the solid-fuel engine for booster stage accelerates it to supersonic speeds and supersonic combusting ramjet engine for hypersonic flight.

Publicly available reports indicate that the new Ukrainian hypersonic cruise missile will be able to reach hypersonic speeds and to exceed a speed of 1,700 m/s. The range of the new missile is estimated to be 300 to 1750 kilometers.

:::::::::::::::::::::

Probably 20 years (at least) until, or if, the thing will be produced. Financing by a wealthier partner and sharing (would Poland like some of these?) might speed things up.

The US are developing hypersonic weapons today, so even though they are significantly behind Russia right now – yes, I absolutely believe that they will have hypersonic missiles to shoot from these launchers, and not after 15 years but much sooner.

The same Mr. Kozyulin said that “the boost phase of Topol-M missiles prior to entry into space is a little under five minutes.” So a “defense” launcher close to Russia’s borders will have time to intercept ICBMs before they go to space. Not now, but in the near future.
And the Russians of course are not going to wait for that future to arrive without doing anything.

Also you miss the fact that even today, these “defense” systems can be used offensively to launch cruise missiles for a decapitation strike. This is certain for the MK-41 launchers in Romania and Poland.

Uhm, Russia is pretty big. A decapitation strike would have to be nuclear (US doesn’t have nukes in Eastern Europe) and to wipe out most (certainly not all) of Russia’s 2nd strike capability would require literally thousands of missiles.

Turkey, Syria, Iran, Israel and Pakistan all have ballistic missiles. All of those countries have chemical/biological weapons and 2 of them have nuclear weapons. The US naturally wants to keep it’s European allies secure from a limited missile strike from one of those states.

I’m not defending US military presence in Europe but while stupid and a waste of money, a small missile shield designed to defend against a small scale attack of crappy missiles is not a threat to Russia and Putin is embarrassing himself to pretend otherwise.

Nuclear wars do not actually end humanity and therefore can be survived and won.

Well, “won” in this instance is a subjective term. I mean, having all of your major population centers completed decimated is not a “win” in my book. Nor is decimating all the population centers of your enemy a consolation prize.

But, along your point, the desert-dwelling Tuareg will go about their business as if nothing ever happened. Those of them with cell phones will wonder why the shiny thing has stopped working.

Peace.

According to Vadim Kozyulin, professor at the Academy of Military Science, in 15 years the SM-3 launchers will be able to knock out our nuclear missiles on Russian territory at the moment of launch.

You believe that?

For this to be true that would mean that the Pentagon is actually downplaying what their weapons are capable of? Why would they do that?

I don’t think the US will even have a

prototype

of such a system in 15 years.

According to Vadim Kozyulin, professor at the Academy of Military Science, in 15 years the SM-3 launchers will be able to knock out our nuclear missiles on Russian territory at the moment of launch.

Also you miss the fact that even today, these “defense” systems can be used offensively to launch cruise missiles for a decapitation strike. This is certain for the MK-41 launchers in Romania and Poland.

This is why I don’t doubt Putin’s announcement, the problem was very real and very serious (existential, even) so it would be natural if the Kremlin has been dedicating considerable effort and funds for some time in order to solve it.

This is really intriguing. The sub-launched nuclear warheads are the key to enforcing the MAD doctrine, since (until now) their existence guaranteed that the threat of a retaliatory strike could never be countered. If Russia has found a way to take out the SSBNs, then it appears she now has first strike capability.

you need me to explain why it would be impossible for the US, with current technology, to intercept an entire salvo Russian ICBMs explicitly designed to penetrate any missile shield?

The US could probably intercept a lot of theatre ballistic missiles like the Scud or the Iranian missiles, but not state of the art ICBMs.

If Russia launched 100 ICBM’s at the US today, I think that maybe 4 or 5 would be intercepted, and I wouldn’t be surprised if it were 0.

Why?

Nuclear wars do not actually end humanity and therefore can be survived and won.

Does the Metro 2033 universe feature radical individual autonomy and city-states? I think Nick Land might approve.

defense.pk

LOL! You went there! Though it’s defence.pk.

Peace.

to quietly trail American SSBNs and suddenly launch at them from deep down at 180 km/h come the day?

I don’t see why this is impossible.

(1) Small torpedo tracking huge SSBN that is equipped with all kind of detection and counter measure equipment will result in detection of the torpedo sooner than later and then it being destroyed w/o any consequences.

(2) Small torpedo has to have some unknown power source. Nuclear power in very small package? Conversion of heat to mechanical how? Stirling Engine–>Generator—>Electric Engine or some Closed Cycle Steam Turbine?

(3) Is 180km/h really possible?

In 1980′s during Reagan they were showing the world animations how the Star Wars system would work. And it all worked beautifully in animations and many people believed it including Ronald Reagan. Did anybody in Russia believe it?

The basic fact remains that the US does not have the capacity to knock out an ICBM/SLBM salvo from Russia, nor does it have the capacity to launch a successful first strike, and it is exceedingly unlikely to obtain this capacity for at least the next few decades.

Why are you so sure?

Because it would be impossible.

But given the known capabilities of these systems, it is irrational for Russia to think that they are aimed at them.

I don’t think US troops should be in Eastern Europe because I see their presence there as a threat to Russia, but the missiles are harmless. There are only a handful and they are obviously targeting Iran (as if Europe needs to be defended from an Iranian ballistic missile attack), not Russia.

Putin basically just gave a speech bragging about weapons that would defeat a US system that doesn’t even exist. This is a farce and it isn’t good for Russia or America or anybody caught in the middle.

That Putin’s speech was illustrated by CGI from a 2007 TV documentary doesn’t inspire confidence.

Would it inspire more confidence if they have invested more in CGI?
Would be just a waste of money, unless they intended to bluff.

The basic fact remains that the US does not have the capacity to knock out an ICBM/SLBM salvo from Russia, nor does it have the capacity to launch a successful first strike, and it is exceedingly unlikely to obtain this capacity for at least the next few decades.

Why are you so sure?

Considering that Russia maintains thousands of active nuclear warheads,…

Barely.

In January 2017 Russia was estimated to have 528 strategic launchers with about 1800 nuclear warheads. The Strategic Rocket Forces are estimated to have 286 operational missile systems of six types that carry 958 warheads. The strategic fleet includes 12 strategic missile submarines with SLBMs on board. The operationally deployed 160 SLBMs can carry 752 nuclear warheads. Strategic aviation bomber force consists of 66 bombers that have about 200 weapons assigned to them.

http://russianforces.org/current/

ways to fight and win a nuclear war

You don’t win in a nuclear exchange – it is pure scorched earth. Basically it is the equivalent of; since you are willing to murder all our babies, we will do the same to yours.

It’s worse than madness.

The amount of money that goes into this one-upmanship is incredible. This to me has been one of the biggest failures of religious leadership across the world – no one is innocent. The major religious leaders should have been talking to their flocks in order to make them realize how immoral the proposition is and to demand that their political leadership at least as hard as they have about building up these weapons, in getting rid of them. There is no reason we can’t come to a wide moral consensus on this issue.

The fact that this nuclear exchange is considered between two Christian nations is a failure on its own level. If it ever occurs, you can kiss Christianity goodbye – (not only will its major centers go up in smoke) it will have been a moral failure of epic proportions; what the Mongol Hordes did will be held up as morally virtuous.

Peace.

Russia sees US missile defense as aimed at them.

That’s not irrational, you can’t really expect people to buy the idea that those missile defense plans are aimed against North Korea or, even more ridiculously, against Iran’s non-existent nukes.
But yes, as you wrote, efficient missile defense seems unlikely, iirc even the tests held under ideal (that is totally unrealistic) conditions had high failure rates. I still find those destabilizing developments undermining mutual deterrence pretty disturbing, much as I dislike most of humanity I’ve got no wish for a nuclear apocalypse.

This whole thing is just childish. I read parts of Putin’s speech and it sounded like it came from Soviet times. I cannot believe that a leader of a world power is talking about his country’s weapons systems like some 17 year old fanboy on defense.pk. I hope that it was just for domestic consumption.

Russia sees US missile defense as aimed at them. They think that the US is trying to create a situation where the US can attack them while remaining safe from MAD.

The US of course is planning no such thing but the Russians have been paranoid since before the end of WWII.

The point of these weapons is to ensure that the US will not have a defense against Russian nuclear ICBM’s (which won’t happen anyway, the US can’t even build a defense against North Korean nukes), and more importantly, that the US will know that it has no such defenses.

That sounds as if you think military planners in Russia might be looking at ways to fight and win a nuclear war…have to admit I find that rather disturbing, such ideas are madness.

Who says it’s not? Hell, it may serve everything certified by the OU!

Don’t doubt the power of the WonderWaffle!

Peace.

Note: I could also see “Putin’s WonderWaffle” as one of those electronic shenanigans he can go around the world and sell after he retires; like the Foreman Grill! He’s gotta think of how he’s going to fund his retirement to Istanbul.

I know, I was having fun – couldn’t help it.

Someone needs to work on controlling the weather – now that’s a Wunderwaffe!

Peace.

Mr. Karlin is referring to this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wunderwaffe

For those who’ve worked in process management, its an interesting exploration on the difficulties of implementing even good ideas without sufficient testing and refinement. Unlike in fiction, prototypes rarely become the superweapon that contributes a massive advantage; its more likely to fall over from something unexpected, such as a sudden southeasternly wind.

This is also why its so expensive to train soldiers, because a lot of training processes, such as marksmanship involve spending significant amounts of funds on ammunition and the like.

that doesn’t sound halal at all. Your weakness disgusts me.

I don’t know about you guys but “Putin’s WunderWaffle” sounds like a pancake house I would patronize daily.

Stay for the hashed Kinzhal served up with some scrambled Zircon! And a full stack topped with Sarmat sauce!

Mm…mmmmm!

Look at the most recent PAK-FA prototypes, they even look much better, IMO.

The missiles are certainly impressive, especially Kinzhal, because it seems to be useful even conventionally, but Martyanov’s analysis sounds a little too optimistic. Shocking, I know. But he has been talking about Russian missile capabilities for a long time now, so he was certainly onto something there.

However, he makes these systems sound like literally unstoppable silver bullets, made possible by the mysterious Russian soul (remember the Great Patriotic War, urrah!!!), which us non-Russians can’t possible understand.

While overall Russian military capabilities are certainly much closer to the US than many/most people realize, not only technologically, but also when it comes to procurement, because 1. purchasing power parity, and 2. the fact that the US military really is expensive to maintain and its procurement and spending has undeniably been quite wasteful, I still find it really hard to believe how some of that hype makes any… arithmetic or mathematical (for lack of a better term) sense.

While it’s also certainly possible, or IMO even likely, that carriers really are very vulnerable to a peer/near-peer A2/AD, and that trend is only going to get worse for the US, it still simply sounds too good to be true.

Because despite all the relative decline and all the issues that I mentioned above, it’s obvious that the American technological and economical power is still massive. Any historical analogues of such weapons anyway? US nukes before 1949/late 60s?? (Again, if you believe all that hype to an extreme.)

Kofman’s articles seems to be quite objective. It certainly brings you back to earth, after reading Martyanov’s piece. According to him, MiG-31BMs seem to require additional upgrades to carry the new missile, and only 50 or so would be upgraded by the mid-20s. So if that’s true, it would clearly be one limitation.

I’m open minded.

I’m not impressed at all with the PAK-FA but on the other hand it appears that Russians (and Euros, for that matter) aren’t as obsessed with low RCS as the US is. When Syria/Iran/Hezbollah go to war with Israel in the next few years we’ll see who was right.

These stand off missile systems could be legit, though. But there is a difference between prototypes and having it actually deployed as part of your force. Again, hopefully we’ll get to see them in action soon.

The question that really needs to be answered is just how much of an authoritarian state Russia really is? Could Putler actually get away with ordering a first strike on the U.S? I mean the supporting cast of oligarchs and loyal cheerleaders seem to love the West, and especially the US, where it’s often reported that they shelter funds (for a rainy day) and send their children to be educated. Matyanov seems to hold a grudge against you, Anatoly, for your formative years were spent in the US getting an education, as he himself, purportedly writes his diatribes against you living somewhere in the West. You guys are starting to really earn your pay as ‘Kremlin Stooges’!

When I watch the US pres. election debates, for instance, I wonder what’s the point of it all. All they do try to shout each other down, and I can’t see hos the citizens are helped in their choice.

You haven’t watched any. They don’t do that. The object varies according to the population on the stage. It can be to distinguish yourself, to avoid embarrassment, or to embarrass your opponent. It’s all about the sound bites you generate.

Well, the Germans were pretty white, too. But Hitler still managed to completely eliminate unemployment in under two years with his economic plan. It can be done …

If Russians want Chinese-style economic growth, then they’re going to have to embrace Chinese-style economic/industrial planning.

Not realistic, because: Russians are white Europeans. With all strengths & weaknesses of that race/culture/identity/genetic-cultural makeup/ whatever….

Imagine Putin debating with the Sobchak girl…
When I watch the US pres. election debates, for instance, I wonder what’s the point of it all. All they do try to shout each other down, and I can’t see hos the citizens are helped in their choice.

The main problem with Putin is that he’s an economic liberal. And with economic liberalism, this is as good as it gets: drag-ass annual GDP growth in the 2-3% range, with all of the profit going to the oligarchs on top. Meanwhile, wages stagnate, while assets prices and the cost of living keep increasing. It’s no different in the West now either.

If Russians want Chinese-style economic growth, then they’re going to have to embrace Chinese-style economic/industrial planning. For openers, they need to ditch Rothschild-financing and nationalize the Russian Central Bank. Then, the government needs to start looking after sectors other than just defense/aerospace and petro-chemical. But Putin will never do that. So I, for one, am not surprised that a growing number of Russian voters are taking a fresh look at the Communists. Hey: it worked for China!

As others have pointed out, with such a massive lead, Putin has nothing to gain and everything to lose by gratifying his opponents with a debate. Why not just let them all claw at each other instead? Even in the US, the front runners–Democrat and Republican–almost never allow third parties into the debate for basically the same reason.

absense of any meaningful choice,

Welcome to the world of liberal democracy where hope springs eternal.

The U.S. no longer benefits anyway from first mover.

That seems a bit premature to claim. Baidu is dominating in China more because of protectionism than fast-follower. If China had allowed Google to compete on equal grounds from early on, there’s not much reason to think that they wouldn’t either A) dominate or B) at least have a plurality of the market share.

That said, I do agree that being a fast-follower is certainly a lot more viable than it used to be but there is still a strong premium on innovation. People attack a company like Samsung but in many areas (semiconductors, DRAM etc) they are in fact at the cutting edge today.

And I already asked this a while ago: but why is Kazakhstan still/already growing well? Does anyone know?

For Kazakhstan, you have to adjust for the fact that their population growth is very rapid.

Therefore, their per capita growth rate will be less impressive once adjusted for this fact. Their population is also younger, and hence there is more propensity to consume a wider variety of goods, which will help internal consumption. As I pointed out before, real household income is still flat in Russia on a YoY basis. Consumption is not, but that is now growing thanks to people taking out consumer loans.

Russia is falling behind in the broader technology race.

Fast follower is viable strategy. It is very difficult to innovate and create.
A country like Russia that has a lot of catching up to do, using fast follower strategy is the smart “economic” method.

Fast Following means targeting desired industry with State Credit. It also means importing knowledge workers, for example professors and experts from the West.

First mover advantage is overblown. For example, Google is not a big player in China due to “fast follower strategy” of using Baidu.

The U.S. no longer benefits anyway from first mover. As soon as something is invented in the U.S., it tends to find itself manufactured in overseas industry.

The U.S. middle class no longer grinds out incremental innovation in the trenches of industry, since industry was outsourced.

Sound point, sir.

Moreover, it’s embarrassing to hear Americans talking about how RUSSIA is unrealistic and not set for sustained economic growth.

It is the USA which is drowning in government debt, unfunded government pension obligations, and household debt. Russia is not.

So far as we can make an educated guess, the USA is likelier to collapse into widespread poverty, chaos, and violence, than Russia in the medium term.

Btw, Bryan MacDonald’s analysis is excellent, IMO:

https://www.rt.com/op-ed/420325-putin-missiles-nuclear-russia/

Predictably, Western media reacted hysterically to Putin’s boasts about Russia’s improved missile capability, while the domestic audience focused on the real meat: the Kremlin is about to embark upon a massive renewal project which will kickstart its economy and hopefully increase the quality of life across the vast country.

Putin realizes there is no short-term hope of detente with the Americans. Thus, he feels the best strategy is to spook them into leaving Russia alone and ceasing the eastward expansion of their NATO military alliance, which will allow Moscow to concentrate on domestic challenges.

For the foreseeable future, it looks that the US-Russia agenda will be limited to just one item: war prevention. Good luck to us all.

— Dmitri Trenin (@DmitriTrenin) March 1, 2018

Why Google Translate when Kremlin does translations right there on official site?

http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/56957

Yes, I remembered that from your recent demographics update.

The official military budget has indeed began to decline, to a level that is slightly below 3% of GDP from this year onwards, or was it 2019? But it’s unclear how big the hidden spending is.

Yes, increasing it by 1.5x by around 2025 is certainly very unrealistic, but much less so by 2030-35.

Many seem to argue that the CBR is being too conservative and that the growth will come as soon as the interest rates fall further. The rates are certainly still very high, that’s for sure. There was also a severe slowdown during the second half of last year. Q2 growth was 2.5%, it was downhill from there.

And I already asked this a while ago: but why is Kazakhstan still/already growing well? Does anyone know? Isn’t actually much more oil dependent (in per capita) than Russia? (Of course, even Russia’s oil dependency was always exaggerated.) So Russia should certainly achieve growth rates that are comparable to the Central Asians. Also, I think Goldman Sachs (lol) predicted that the Russian economy would grow by more than 3% already this year.

Yeah, I noticed that. Just pointed out that out anyway, because he happened to mention it with the “50% growth” and also just as an example of a very realistic “prediction”.

I don’t actually speak Russian either, I just Google translated the speech lol, and it seemed to turn out well. (However, my plan is to start studying both Russian and Mandarin this fall.)

He was actually talking about bringing the investment “up to 25 percent of GDP, and then to 27 percent”. I made a mistake (not Google! ), it was supposed to read: “By the middle of the next decade, small and medium sized businesses contribution to the country’s GDP should approach 40 percent,” IIRC. Apologies. 40% on investment would certainly be impossible. But the Russian government has been talking about 20-25% for a while now.

Well, I don’t deny that the speech was somewhat of a mixed bag, which I guess is inevitable, but I thought it was pretty good all things considered. Putin has apparently never been much of a speaker anyway and I much rather read (in my case) about some boring economic indicators than listen to Obama’s “hope and change” mantras and other similar Western “end of history” BS. Not to mention the grandiose visions didn’t work too well for the Soviets either, the Russians are done with that. And I just felt that the “50% growth in 6 years” part was kind of taken out of context a little bit.

I don’t disagree with you all that much, but let’s try a contrarian view:

What you say is at its core the classic, liberal Western economics that is based on ‘more of everything is better‘. More workers, better, More flexibility, better. More ‘new companies’, better, etc… But is it?

More ‘flexible’ workers also means a huge pressure on incomes – it is a basic supply-demand equation, more of something you have, less it is worth. When you look at history, the best times for ordinary people (90%+ of population) have always been during times of shortage of labor. People get better salaries, more opportunities, less stress, working conditions usually improve. That often happened after a war or with labor markets protected by closed borders (or a lack of ‘flexibility’ within a country). One good example is the dramatic improvement in living standards in Germany-Austria after WWII. There was hardly anything better than being a 20-year old survivor of WWII around 1950-55.

Tight labor markets lead to higher incomes and that leads to higher consumption. Asset prices go up, opportunities are better. Maybe the overall ‘GNP’ is not as high at it would be with more of everything, but day-to-day lives for most people are better. Not necessarily for ‘entrepreneurs’, since they usually depend on a mindless expansion of everything. But societies should nor be run for the benefit of hustlers. They can always move to London or New York, if that is what they want.

I think Russia is relatively well positioned, good economy largely depends on a ratio of resources to people. Russia has one of he best in the world. Some of it will always get stolen and wasted. But given the self-inflicted collapse that will come in the West – the combination of Third World over-population migration, huge debts, and just plain liberal post-modern stupidity – Russia looks like a pretty good bet. That’s why there is the hysteria in the West.

First presidential election I can vote in, and no one I particularly want to vote for. A bummer So in the absense of any meaningful choice, the emotional dilemma is whether to vote for Putin to stick it to the west, or to vote for Grudinin to stick it to Putin (and the mainstream media).

Post-Soviet people have this idea, that if they could just get the right leader, they could sit back and watch as their wages grow.

Americans must be Post-Soviet people then.

Sure, I made a post about Russia’s structural problems a couple of months back:

Numerous factors affect the economic growth. Russia’s working-age population recently started to decline – this will be a major drag on GDP till 2030. There is other stuff as well. Russia is plagued by low labor productivity. Soviet era industrial enterprises employ more people than they need, because the government tells them to, because that’s their way of maintaining social peace. You can’t just fire extra workers, because a lot of these industrial enterprises are located in isolated Soviet era monotowns”, where people have nothing else do. People won’t move. Russia’s labor mobility is low for the reasons that are economic, administrative and cultural.

http://www.unz.com/akarlin/sovkhoz-candidate/#comment-2132569

That’s just a few examples. Fixing these issues will require painful reforms, that Putin will never attempt as they have a chance of destabilising his regime. And even if he attempts these reforms, growth is not guaranteed.

The economy is a highly complex system, and growth is the product of the decisions, made by millions of independent economic agents. The government may attempt to incentivize them (by removing structural bottlenecks in the economy, improving business climate etc), but it has no sure way of knowing how agents in economy will respond to government’s incentives, it certainly has no control over their decision-making. To put it simply, the government is not responsible for economic growth. It’s up to the people themselves really: they gotta start new companies, invent new products and get rich. The government must give them freedom to do so. Apart from that, so long as the government is avoiding steps that are actively harmful such as price controls, there is not much else the dude in the Kremlin can do for economic growth.

Post-Soviet people have this idea, that if they could just get the right leader, they could sit back and watch as their wages grow. That’s plain naivety.

As has been pointed out before here, there’s absolutely no need to go looking for complicated explanations rooted in esoteric cultural features.

It’s not a complicated explanation. Anybody who’s ever lived in Russia knows this without a doubt naturally.

If Putin had a low rating, that’d be all the more reason for him to not engage in debate.

Orbán had debates with his main opponents in 1998, 2002, and 2006, but not since then.

Russia is an Asiatic country in that it has lots of sacralized formal and informal rituals surrounding political power.

Debating is simply not something that a Russian Autocrat (c) can ever do without losing face.

As has been pointed out before here, there’s absolutely no need to go looking for complicated explanations rooted in esoteric cultural features.

Putin doesn’t engage in debates because he doesn’t need to, and he’s not stupid. He’s winning by miles, and only a very stupid politician agrees to debate his opponents in that situation, unless there is very strong pressure to do so.

Why would a politician polling at 80% choose to engage in a debate with his rivals? It’s all downside risk for him.

I have to ask why Putin is not in those debates, even if his party has a high odds of winning, not taking part in such debates on seems to portray that peoples votes are taken for granted, which can long term become a problem.

Russia is an Asiatic country in that it has lots of sacralized formal and informal rituals surrounding political power.

Debating is simply not something that a Russian Autocrat (c) can ever do without losing face.

When it comes to GDP, it seems that he’s clearly talking about PPP (“the five largest economies in the world”). So doesn’t that top 5 spot sound achievable? If I’m not mistaken, it’s pretty much inevitable at this point.

Oh, I agree with that. But if you paid close attention to my comment, you’d noticed that I was not talking about the feasibility of Russia being a top 5 economy in PPP terms in the near future

I was talking about this:

increasing GDP by 50% over the next 6 years, implying 7% growth

I am not a fluent Russian speaker, though perhaps you are, so I am reliant on others relaying the speech to me. I take AK’s word at face-value and so when he writes that, I assume it is correct. You may disagree with AK’s relay of Putin’s speech, but that is a bone of contention you’ll have with him, not with those who rely on the translation

I can’t say how realistic all of those plans are.

The usual caveat that I have to rely on other people being accurate – in this case you and your list of Putin’s speech – I think it is a mixed bag. Aiming to get a investment share of GDP to 40% by the end of next decade is very unrealistic. Even high-saving nations like South Korea get barely more than 30-32%. China does get over 40% but that is largely because of massive distortions and even the Chinese are admitting that it is excessive. Unless Russia wants to run gigantic current account deficits, it needs to match that investment rate by raising the savings rate to a similar level and that is also unrealistic.

This is because investment-led growth has to be paired with export-led industrialisation. Russia’s exports as a share of GDP is quite low, and most of what it exports is natural resources. Furthermore, it doesn’t even need 40% investment of GDP. But I’m not going to go off in a giant detour of economic theory for the purposes of a comment.

The state’s share in the economy should gradually decline

This is another promise I find unrealistic. Not because it is unfeasible per se. More so because Putin’s instincts are decidedly statist. As AK has pointed out, the state now controls close to 70% of the economy. Putin has been in power for 18 years.

The only way for this to happen is for him to break all past historical precedent and radically move in the other direction. Is it possible? Yes. But probable? No. If he had a strong desire to decrease the state’s involvement, we would have seen it by now and those who insist otherwise have the burden of proof on them, rather than to ask us to suspect disbelief and assume that a person’s established behaviour, at an advanced age and after 18 years of power, will suddenly change on a dime. It can happen, as can anything, but those insisting that it will have the proof of burden, not the other way around. In my humble opinion, of course. Also, the caveat that your translation/interpretation is correct naturally applies. Otherwise I may be too harsh on Putin through no fault of his own!

isn’t this about some video which basically is propaganda for the great replacement

It’s much greater than that. The Irish government will invest money to push a political program in the private media, both through ads but also paid Op-Eds. There won’t be any counter-veiling opinions on it.

The numbers we are talking about are striking. 2 million new citizens up to 2040, hence the name “Project Ireland 2040″. Just for context, Ireland’s current population is a mere 4.7 million.

We’re talking 42% of Ireland’s current population. Over less than just 22 years. Most of them coming from non-EU countries. You’d think that the private media would have an open (and critical) debate over this, instead it is allowing itself to be used as a vehicle for government propaganda in order to condition the Irish to accept this.

Hence my point about the fictitious “independent” media in the West. When it actually counts, they roll over like dogs.

Care to elaborate on why are you so blackpilled about the structure of the Russian economy ?
I mean I am sure there are some serious structural problems otherwise we wouldn’t have ended up in these years of stagnation. But what are these problems and how hard is it to fix them ? Why do you believe that the president of Russia does not have the ability to fix them ?

He, like most Russians, just doesn’t care about Ukraine.

It’s like with the establishment Republican politicians and immigration (according to Derb.) Most of them had never thought about the issue to form any sort of opinion, so, if asked, they get a deer-in-the-headlights- look and mouth some politically correct bromide.

Based on my observations, only two types of people in Russia care about Ukraine:

1. A larger group: People with some personal connection to Ukraine; usually who are from Ukraine.
2. A tiny group: History nerds who think a tremendous amount about the past.

Others don’t care.

Subject was interesting for around 6 months, maybe 1 year if you’re really engrossed – but now this is four years later, of course most people are not paying much attention about the subject, beyond viewing things at the expense of Ukrainians.

Heads up! Heads up!
Here’s another one!
And a – and another one
OOHHHHHHHH!!!

[rubbish CGI plays]

Yeek yeek! (Woop woop!) why you all in my ear?!
Making a whole bunch of threats that I don’t like to hear!
Get nuked motherfucker, you don’t know me like that!
Yeek yeek woop woop!! I ain’t playing around!
Make one false move I’ll take ya down
Get nuked muhfucker! You don’t know me like that!
(Get nuked muhfucker!! You don’t know me like that!!) – Vladimir V Putin.