Article

2008-10-22 Caucasus/Russia/Central Asia

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by 3dc 2008-10-22 00:00|| || Front Page|| [11134 views ] Top

#1 Russia is counting on Obama to cancel the program.

Posted by DoDo 2008-10-22 13:13|| 2008-10-22 13:13|| Front Page Top

#2 Nothing new in the article. Russian position makes sense. But Obama probably won't cancel the program b/c it's out of his hands now. What Obama can do is persuade the Poles and the Chechs to allow real-time monitoring of those facilities by the Russians. That would solve the whole issue.

Posted by General_Comment 2008-10-22 15:48|| 2008-10-22 15:48|| Front Page Top

#3 Please explain how Russia's position makes sense. These bases are gonna be looking southeastward to guard against launches from the middle east. They won't pick up anything from the ex-Soviet Unions, or if they do just barely. I cannot see how they are an actual threat to Russia, just to Russian sales to thuggish nations.

Please enlighten me General_Comment.

Posted by rjschwarz 2008-10-22 16:12|| 2008-10-22 16:12|| Front Page Top

#4 Please enlighten me General_Comment.

With pleasure.

Posted by General_Comment 2008-10-22 16:35|| 2008-10-22 16:35|| Front Page Top

#5 These bases are gonna be looking southeastward to guard against launches from the middle east. They won't pick up anything from the ex-Soviet Unions, or if they do just barely.

There is absolutely no guarantee that the radar is going to look southward, b/c (and I base this supposition on the X-Band radar currently floating off of Alaska) [will send you a link in the next post] the radar is going to be 360 degrees phased-array. It can and will look anywhere it wants. Maybe it will have some limitations, maybe its coverage area is going to be limited to 120 degrees. Still it will be able to look into Russia, and surely will.

Posted by General_Comment 2008-10-22 16:39|| 2008-10-22 16:39|| Front Page Top

#6 Here is the link to the X-band sea based radar:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sea-based_X-band_Radar

Posted by General_Comment 2008-10-22 16:41|| 2008-10-22 16:41|| Front Page Top

#7 The radar is described by Lt. Gen Trey Obering (director of MDA) as being able to track an object the size of a baseball over San Francisco in California from the Chesapeake Bay in Virginia, approximately 2900 miles.

G_C: that about all the way from Poland to the Ural Mountains.

Posted by General_Comment 2008-10-22 16:44|| 2008-10-22 16:44|| Front Page Top

#8 And finally, this is what kills me the most:

"The Sea-Based X-Band Radar is mounted on a 5th generation Norwegian-designed, Russian-built CS-50 semi-submersible twin-hulled oil-drilling platform."

The Russians have even built the platform for you guys. One the bright side: this is what I call capitalism.

Posted by General_Comment 2008-10-22 16:49|| 2008-10-22 16:49|| Front Page Top

#9 Wouldn't a Russian missile tend to go over the pole and pretty much be over the horizon as far as any bases in Eastern Europe are considered? Thus the placement of such sites in Eastern Europe, the shortest path between the middle east and the USA.

If we were worried about Russia we'd make an ice-ready Aegis cruiser or keep Awacs up over the pole the way the B-52s used to be.

You complaints still seem like bull to me.

Posted by rjschwarz 2008-10-22 17:21|| 2008-10-22 17:21|| Front Page Top

#10 The radar is needed for two things: (i) intelligence gathering during the peace time, not when the missiles are actually launched, and (ii) when the missiles are actually launched it is the detection of their launch and tracking in the all important boost phase which are important. Important, because the boost phase is the best time to shoot them either from, for e.g. a bunch of flying Boeings with lasers, or a future developed space based assets. Basically the idea here is to put pressure on Russians that the U.S. can do a preventive strike but the Russians will be denied or at least in doubt about their ability to respond. The sea-based assets while ameliorate such concerns do not comletely resolve them and in addition are substantially more expensive to maintain. Russia wants to rely primarily on its land-based systems for the cost of maintanance and reliability reasons.

Finally, with regard to the missiles going over the North Pole - yes some would, but for the launch bases in Tatischevo and Saratov they will have to spend a significant amount of time over European Russia.

Posted by General_Comment 2008-10-22 17:57|| 2008-10-22 17:57|| Front Page Top

#11 BTW, that is why Russia is proceeding with the Borei class boomers which are going to be stationed not in the Kola peninsula - traditionally the dominant boomer location, but in the Pacific. And with mobile Topol-M and SS-24, 6-10 MIRVed: both with faster boost phases and at least some with the new hypersonic warheads (although I cannot figure out how one could fit those in a space roughtly same as previously)

Posted by General_Comment 2008-10-22 18:04|| 2008-10-22 18:04|| Front Page Top

#12 hmmmm oil's down again today. Which of those will actually ever get done? I predict: "none"

Posted by Frank G">Frank G 2008-10-22 18:25|| 2008-10-22 18:25|| Front Page Top

#13 Oil is down, gas is steady . . . . No worries.

Posted by General_Comment 2008-10-22 18:34|| 2008-10-22 18:34|| Front Page Top

#14 BTW, Senator Kyl was just bitching about dergadation of America's nuclear deterrent at his lecture at Marshall Institute: http://www.marshall.org/article.php?id=611

Posted by General_Comment 2008-10-22 18:36|| 2008-10-22 18:36|| Front Page Top

#15 "none"

You know also what I have to say to this: In the 90's the local press, including the avilation magazines were bitching and moaning that Russia will never be able to put another aircraft into service, let alone launch the 5th generation fighter. But you know what, since then they have been doing new aircraft, including Su-35 and Mig-29SMT, and are actively working on the 5th gen. And they are rearming the army. So I would not be so categorical.

Posted by General_Comment 2008-10-22 18:40|| 2008-10-22 18:40|| Front Page Top

#16 Russia needs to get over itself. We have absolutely NO interest in attacking Russia - they're not that important.

The Euros are nervous, as well they should be, given ~~the Soviet Union's~~ Russia's history and present ~~lebensraum~~ expansionist behavior.

Here's a free clue, Russia: A missle shield is meant to stop missles; shooting back is a separate operation. Don't shoot at countries with a missle shield, you won't have missles shot at you by countries with a missle sheild.

Posted by Barbara Skolaut">Barbara Skolaut 2008-10-22 18:50|| http://ariellestjohndesigns.com/]">[http://ariellestjohndesigns.com/] 2008-10-22 18:50|| Front Page Top

#17 Barb, simplistic.

Posted by General_Comment 2008-10-22 18:52|| 2008-10-22 18:52|| Front Page Top

#18 The Euros are nervous, as well they should be, given the Soviet Union's Russia's history and present lebensraum expansionist behavior.

Answer:
1812 - Napoleon (France) invades Russia;
1941 - Hitler (Germany) invades Russia.

Conclusion: self-explanatory.

Posted by General_Comment 2008-10-22 18:56|| 2008-10-22 18:56|| Front Page Top

#19 General_Comment - so ...
Since you argue for Russia...
The Russian Far East - nie Siberia et. al. is being encroached by Chinese peoples at a faster rate than the Mexicans are encroaching on the USA...
So why is the Chapt 11 USSR currently under KGB/GRU re-org mgmt (Russia on the exchange) more worried about the USA then the PRC?
And yes we need to worry much more about our southern borders too. It doesn't compute...
Enlighten me..

As a side note.. I worked with a lot of ex-types from the Soviet Union after it fell. Even hold a patent with one of your ex-key favored ones... so I am somewhat familiar with the POVs --- but a key question I asked a while back had an interesting answer...

The question was ... since it is getting better in Russia have you considered moving back to live there? After all you have a daughter still in Moscow...
Answer: I am happy to go back an visit and help her. I love the country. Its much better... but ARE YOU CRAZY -- I don't want to live there. Its still a disaster! Just better...
I'm staying in LA. I have a great salary, good bennies, travel all over the world on biz and live in the best climate in the world... I am not stupid.

Posted by 3dc 2008-10-22 21:08|| 2008-10-22 21:08|| Front Page Top

#20 Addressing the issues raised in turn:

1) Chapter 11 for your information is not a disaster, but a way to reorganize a company without it going out of business;

2) I don't worry about China, despite the Far Eastern concerns because, curiously enough, they may be culturally closer to Russians than Americans. Anglo-Saxon mentality is truly different. And Chinese have been exposed to Russian movies, songs, poetry, prose etc. back in the day, and even now. Chinese, of course are more different from Russians phenotypically than Americans, but somehow the culture factor still wins. One disclaimer though: some Russians do not like Chinese b/c of what you said.

3)"since it is getting better in Russia have you considered moving back to live there?"

A: "That IS the right question." iRobot
I have. But here is the rub. Once you carier reaches a certain level and you become too invested and you begin having kids here, the balance shifts. It is not easy after that. Just like here, there you will be needed for something that you can do on a very practical level. And just like here, the "good" positions are taken. And when you come back there, where people are making money, they are going to look at you and ask "Who the f are you?" I also would like to note that (I believe you may be an Indian) it is not quite like computer, IT, engineers from India coming back to India. Also people who left Russia are perceived by people with, say, "good" jobs are somewhat as traitors, b/c they stuck it out, but you left. It's complicated; culturally.
So, it is not merely enough to be "better" than before. Even if Russia magically reaches the ecomonic level of the U.S., there is still no coming back.

Posted by General_Comment 2008-10-22 22:04|| 2008-10-22 22:04|| Front Page Top

#21 General_Comment, the only way you could possibly move your family to Russia would be as ex-pats, and your company has no branch office in Moscow. They are Americans, and will see no reason to give that up for your yearnings. My father would have liked to move back to Israel after he retired, but my mother had absolutely no interest in yet again learning a new language and making a new life.

Funny, 3dc, you don't look Indian.. ;-)

Posted by trailing wife ">trailing wife 2008-10-22 22:29|| 2008-10-22 22:29|| Front Page Top

#22 They are Americans

They are not in the sense that you are assuming here.

Posted by General_Comment 2008-10-22 22:43|| 2008-10-22 22:43|| Front Page Top

#23 I didn't assume that at all. Fifth column communists carry a stink about them

Posted by Frank G">Frank G 2008-10-22 22:57|| 2008-10-22 22:57|| Front Page Top

#24 FG, I am not speaking to you, but to TW.

I am not a Fifth columnist, for that it has to be someone like you.

Posted by General_Comment 2008-10-22 23:01|| 2008-10-22 23:01|| Front Page Top

23:58 3dc
23:57 Sherry
23:52 Don Vito Omeling5062
23:51 ex-lib
23:46 ex-lib
23:42 General_Comment
23:39 Betty
23:35 General_Comment
23:35 clipatuillath
23:34 JosephMendiola
23:31 USN, Ret.
23:24 Sherry
23:24 Betty
23:22 General_Comment
23:20 JosephMendiola
23:19 Betty
23:19 Steve White
23:17 General_Comment
23:17 Betty
23:15 JosephMendiola
23:14 USN, Ret.
23:13 CrazyFool
23:09 Betty
23:09 JosephMendiola