Return of the Cold War--will it go hot?

http://thehill.com/policy/defense/380364-china-russia-eclipse-us-in-hypersonic-missiles-prompting-fears

Russia, China eclipse US in hypersonic missiles, prompting fears

Russia and China are outpacing the United States in the development of super-fast missile technology, Pentagon officials and key lawmakers are warning.

Russia says it successfully tested a so-called hypersonic missile this month, while China tested a similar system last year expected to enter service soon.

“Right now, we’re helpless,” Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), a senior member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said in advocating for more investment in hypersonics, along with missile defense.

Hypersonics are generally defined as missiles that can fly more than five times the speed of sound.

Gen. John Hyten, commander of U.S. Strategic Command, last week described a hypersonic as a missile that starts out “like a ballistic missile, but then it depresses the trajectory and then flies more like a cruise missile or an airplane. So it goes up into the low reaches of space, and then turns immediately back down and then levels out and flies at a very high level of speed.”

In November, China reportedly conducted two tests of a ballistic missile with a hypersonic glide vehicle that U.S. assessments expect to reach initial operating capability around 2020. The country had already conducted at least seven tests of experimental systems from 2014 to 2016.

Meanwhile, earlier this month, Russian President Vladimir Putin delivered a flashy state of the nation address to tout a slate of new weapons, including a hypersonic missile he claimed was “invincible” against U.S. missile defenses. About a week later, Russia claimed it successfully tested a hypersonic.

At the time of Putin’s announcement, the Pentagon said it was “not surprised” by the report and assured the public that it is “fully prepared” to respond to such a threat.

But in congressional testimony last week, Hyten conceded U.S. missile defense cannot stop hypersonics. He said that the U.S. is instead relying on nuclear deterrence, or the threat of a retaliatory U.S. strike, as its defense against such missiles.

“We don’t have any defense that could deny the employment of such a weapon against us, so our response would be our deterrent force, which would be the triad and the nuclear capabilities that we have to respond to such a threat,” Hyten told the Senate Armed Services Committee.

To bolster missile defenses against hypersonics, Hyten advocated space-based sensors.

“I believe we need to pursue improved sensor capabilities to be able to track, characterize and attribute the threats, wherever they come from,” he said. “And, right now, we have a challenge with that, with our current on-orbit space architecture and the limited number of radars that we have around the world. In order to see those threats, I believe we need a new space sensor architecture.”

Asked if the U.S. is really falling behind Russia and China on hypersonics, Thomas Karako, director of the Missile Defense Project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, said flatly: “Yes.”

“And the reason is the U.S. hasn’t been doing anything near the same pace both in terms of developing our own capabilities but also failing to develop sensors and shooters necessary to shoot down theirs,” he continued.

Terrestrial sensors are limited in their ability because of the curvature of the earth, Karako said, but “you can’t hide from a robust constellation of space-based sensors.”

Yet while the last five administrations have identified space-based sensors as a critical need on paper, nothing has come to fruition, he said.

“One of the reasons that we haven’t prioritized the hypersonic threat is we were slow to kind of appreciate not merely the Russia and China problem, but the Russia and China missile problem,” Karako said.

In that regard, he credited the National Defense Strategy and the Nuclear Posture Review, both of which were unveiled by the Trump administration earlier this year, for their renewed focus on a “great power competition” with Russia and China.

Sen. Deb Fischer (R-Neb.), chairwoman of the Senate Armed Services Strategic Forces Subcommittee, likewise cited them as helping the U.S. get back on track in the area of hypersonics.

“I think we are aware of the capabilities that our adversaries have, and … whether it’s the Nuclear Posture Review, National Defense Strategy, these are all laid out because of the identification of the threats we have,” she said.

Fischer added that there “probably will be” something about hypersonics in her subcommittee’s portion of this year’s annual defense policy bill.

But the Nuclear Posture Review, in particular, has been controversial for its call to develop a sea-launched nuclear cruise missile and a “low yield” warhead for submarine-launched ballistic missiles. Those new capabilities are part of the deterrence that Hyten cited, but critics say the document is poised to fuel an arms race.

“Calling for the addition of new weapons and weapons capabilities to our arsenal and expanding the role of nuclear weapons in U.S. national security strategy imposes significant economic burdens and undermines decades of United States leadership to prevent the use and spread of nuclear weapons,” more than 40 House Democrats, led by Reps. Earl Blumenauer (Ore.), Barbara Lee (Calif.) and Mike Quigley (Ill.), wrote Monday in a letter to President Trump.

“We oppose this approach and will continue to support maintaining an effective nuclear deterrent without wasting taxpayer dollars, inciting a new arms race or risking nuclear conflict,” they said.

In addition to the nuclear review, Pentagon officials have been touting budget proposals that would put more money toward hypersonics and missile defense that they say will help close the gap with Russia and China.

Hyten told the Senate Armed Services Committee that there’s $42 million in the fiscal year 2019 budget for the Air Force and the Missile Defense Agency to work on a prototype for space-based sensors.

Air Force Secretary Heather Wilson, meanwhile, told the House Armed Services Committee last week her fiscal 2019 budget includes $258 million for hypersonics.

And Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) Director Steven Walker touted his $256.7 million fiscal 2019 budget for hypersonic missile development the same day as Putin’s press conference. Still, he said, DARPA needs more money for infrastructure to test the missiles, as most of the agency’s testing is done out of one facility.

“The dollars that were allocated in this budget were great, but they were really focused on adding more flight tests and getting some of our offensive capability further down the line into operational prototypes,” he told the Defense Writers Group. “We do need an infusion of dollars in our infrastructure to do hypersonics.”

Inhofe, the senator from Oklahoma, said he’s most worried about the missile defense issue, adding there “appears to be no defense” against hypersonics. To him, the answer is reversing defense budget cuts, which Congress has taken steps to do in a two-year budget deal and a recently passed appropriations bill for fiscal 2018.

“We need to make up the losses that we had during the Obama administration by putting a priority, which we are doing now, on the military,” he said.

[b]My take: this may be the exact reason Trump signed the horrible spending bill. When their side ups the ante on first-strike capability, we of course have to try to keep up and pass them.

If you follow our ongoing relationship with Russia and China, it is deteriorating into a new Cold War. Let’s hope it doesn’t go hot.[/b]

http://www.breitbart.com/london/2018/03/27/russias-pravda-state-real-full-scale-cold-war-salisbury-poisoning/

Russia’s Pravda: ‘We Are in a State of Real and Full-Scale Cold War’ over Salisbury Poisoning

Russia’s Pravda news portal, the online descendant of the infamous Soviet-era Communist propaganda sheet, responded to the expulsion of Russian diplomats from several Western nations on Monday by invoking the Cold War, referencing the remarks of the Russian ambassador to the U.S. calling the move a “tantrum”.
While the English Pravda edition on Monday limited its content to listing the nations which had so far expelled Russian diplomats and embedding a YouTube video warning “Russia and UK on verge of war because of Theresa May’s circus show”, the Russian language version of the same article edition was more explicit.

Published within 15 minutes of the English edition, Pravda’s Russian headline stated the expulsions were seen as a prelude to all-out war, and quoted at length the editor of Russian current affairs journal Russia in Global Politics Fedor Lukyanov.

His claim that “a multilateral diplomatic war has begun between Russia and the West”, that the states involved are now in a real state of Cold War comes as a serious escalation in rhetoric from a news organisation traditionally thought of as a Kremlin mouthpiece.

“In the foreseeable future, there is no hope for improving relations or progress in any areas, we are in a state of real and full-scale Cold War with all the ensuing consequences. The main and only task is to minimize risks, prevent the conflict from turning into an even more militarised phase.”

My take: even though the Soviet Union (supposedly) no longer exists, I’m one to believe that Pravda still speaks only with the blessing of the Russian government, so this article (in my opinion) represents what the Russian leaders really think but might not say so through diplomatic channels.

Lot of bluster from them to scare the sheep, no different than the original cold war.

We got a peek at the War Machine the USSR had built after the last Cold War ended.
Once we got a good look at what the Commies had waiting for us if WW III kicked off a lot of what we faced was a paper tiger, not entirely mind you, but there was some amazingly screwed up stuff going on.
I seem to remember things like missile silos leaking both fuel and nuclear materials. Entire Tank divisions that were inoperable due to lack of replacement parts, maintenance and POL.
And well, there was Chernobyl of course. Just a more memorable screw up.
Even a three legged dog gets lucky once in a while and even a single on target missile would be a history changing event, but history also days the Russians have been known to be full of crap when bragging about their technical superiority.
They are great at exporting some third rate hardware and pushing around third rate powers.

Point taken. I remember when they were trying to get the Russian space shuttle or something going. It blew up on the launch pad, crashed, or otherwise failed. I remember a Russian commentator saying, “Typical Soviet equipment. It doesn’t work.” I’ve seen photos of Russian T-34’s in World War II going into battle with a spare transmission strapped to the rear deck, so they do have a long history of making crap.

Still, if enough works to get through…

Not to worry; Butterhairwants to ban all our bullets, so all will be right with the world again.

If the Capitol Building caught on fire, democraps would start playing with matches; it boggles the mind, what bright, shiny, objects capture their attention, instead of paying attention to the Constitution they took an oath to uphold, and the nation they should be TRYING to defend. :rolleyes:

Here’s a thought, if they put their efforts into actually defending the Constitution, they’d probably screw that up like everything else and we might actually be in a worse position.

Both the Russians and the Chinese can be trusted to do what they feel is in their own best interests. Neither is currently driven by any kind of militant religious extremism or ultra-nationalism that would see itself as the rightful ruler of the world. There are no trade routes or land areas over which we are in dispute with either country. And even if Russia and China allied against us and we stood alone without any allied support, there is a very good chance we would still be victorious, and even if we lost, it would likely be a Pyrrhic victory for Russia and China. As such, I’m not really concerned about any large scale “hot” war breaking out between us and either country. I don’t really even see a cold war breaking out beyond the current tension. What drove the Cold War was that two different ideologies were wrestling for complete control of the world. Communism preached that it’s goal was to conquer the world, and freedom and rights needed to be suppressed until true communism could become a reality. Their world was incompatible with ours. While there is a large degree of difference in the freedom between the U.S., Russia, and China, none of the 3 currently have any ideologies that make them unable to truly co-exist with the others. As such, the need for conflict, either cold or hot, is currently not enough to spark either a cold or hot war.

Third World " brush fire wars" seem to be the go to tactic for the Russians and Chinese.
They start some BS and can count on us to over react until we dump truck loads of money and lives in to a crap hole third world shill that will not allow us a victory.
We pretty much fall for it every time.
It’s a form of economic warfare and it breaks the will of the people to fight.

Nope. The Buran as it was called had one successful launch, flight/orbit and and landing. And it accomplished this without a human crew. The problem with it was it’s only flight happened in November of '88 shortly before the USSR started coming apart and that’s what killed it off.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buran_(spacecraft)

https://www.popsci.com/why-soviet-space-shuttle-was-left-rot#page-13

https://www.cnn.com/style/article/baikonur-buran-soviet-space-shuttle/index.html

I said, “or something.”

I don’t remember what it was that failed. It was some Soviet spacecraft, missile, or something that launched from a pad. I only thought it might have been the Soviet space shuttle. It’s been too long. The Eighties were a long time ago.

Don’t get me wrong, they’ve often got things right, but they also have a record of some amazingly poorly designed ideas making it far in to development before being willing to admit failure.
The T64 MBT went from a terrible threat to Europe to a major joke amoung the U.S. Armor community as the transmission design guaranteed that as soon as you moved off-road and in less than ideal conditions it would high center on the transmission and become immobile and required a recovery vehicle to move it.
The thing about “The State is never Wrong.” Even a very junior Tank Commander could point out the design flaw, but if you did, you’re screwed.

I’d expect the hot part to be the brushfire wars previously mentioned, along with various covert/clandestine ops. Sabotage, assassinations, terrorism… that kind of underhanded shit that should get anyone caught at it’s head lopped off on-the-spot and mailed back to the Kremlin with their amputated genitals stuffed in their mouth. (This is an old KGB intimidation tactic, so Vlad should get the message loud and clear.)

Russians and China will join forces but plan on killing off the other one after they do us first would be the tactic
knowing both are bluffing about powers they are playing a puff the chest game

but I am sure our gov will have new missiles made in China and say NO they are fine they would never do anything they are friends

unless we turn the population direction around I do think we are kinda hosed with our current idiotic congress etc…

https://www.npr.org/2018/02/21/587731730/russian-trolls-are-flooding-social-media-with-messages-meant-to-increase-tension

While not exactly cold war related, this does relate to current events and Rossiya, thoughts?

Dont we have anti-missle lasers?

We did… one Airborne Laser prototype on a brand-new 747 that Butt-F*** Barry ordered cut up all but unflown despite Federal law requiring that all USAF prototype aircraft go to the Air Force Museum.

I’ve said for a long time, we ****ed up with the Soviet Union and more the Russians. The Communists have infiltrated America like a virus. And Russia we ****ed up too. They will never be a friend or ally, but they don’t have to be an enemy. Putin is a pro, a Cold War warrior and spy. But he’s not a Communist, he hates them. He’s an oligarch and a Russian Nationalist.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

They resent us. Because they lost the Cold War but as Putin once stated, paraphrasing, the US could have been a great ally to help them rebuild and show them how to operate as a capitalist society. Instead, they damn near starved for well over a decade. I agree with that. The Russian people idealize us, they love our music, our culture, they are demographically predominately a younger nation- they could have been great allies to us and to Europe. It just seems senseless to lose what could have been a great opportunity for nation building.

That whole Russian reset nonsense with the easy button was a slap in the face to them too. While things were mishandled under Clinton and Bush(es), that reset was when things really started getting rocky between us.
What I really hate is people are dying and more are going to die because of Obama and HRC’s foreign policy decisions.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro