Russia to Mass Produce Oreshnik IRBM

Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here.

quote:

---

An unnamed American official told ABC this was no ICBM but an “experimental medium-range ballistic missile.” Others said it was an “intermediate-range ballistic massile,” or IRBM. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said otherwise in a post on Telegram: “All characteristics — speed, height — point to an ICBM,” he said, while Ukrainian army officials said they were “95% certain” it was an ICBM. Russians offered no comment, but Moskovsky Komsomolets reported the missile may have been an R-35M, which was once believed to give Russia first-strike capability and nicknamed “Satan” by NATO. The Russian daily added:

If the information about the launch of an ICBM is confirmed, this will become a clear signal to Kyiv: a nuclear warhead may arrive next.

---

quote:

---

Now, with respect to ATACMs. Describing these missiles as long-range is inaccurate. I want to briefly review how the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (aka INF) came to be. The Europeans were terrified in the early 1980s by Soviet intermediate-range ballistic missiles because those missiles could hit all major cities in Europe. The US responded by deploying Pershing II missiles. According to Ray McGovern, the Soviets approached the United States and suggested making a deal to eliminate the intermediate-range missiles. Ray says he briefed the White House that this was a legitimate offer and the rest is history — Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev signed the INF Treaty on December 8, 1987. The treaty did the following:

The INF Treaty banned all of the two nations’ nuclear and conventional ground-launched ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, and missile launchers with ranges of 500–1,000 kilometers (310–620 mi) (short medium-range) and 1,000–5,500 km (620–3,420 mi) (intermediate-range).

So, by the definitions in this treaty, an ATACM is NOT even a short medium-range missile because it only can travel a maximum of 190 miles. Storm Shadow and SCALP missiles are another ball game. They fall into the short medium-range category. Russia, on the other hand, now has demonstrated that it has a hypersonic MIRV (i.e., Multiple Independently Targetable Reentry Vehicle) intermediate-range missile that can strike every city in Europe withing 20 minutes. It covers up to 5,000 kilometers. NATO has no answer to this threat.

---

quote:

---

If these things are akin to SCUDS.....I would no be too worried.

---

Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here.

quote:

---

why is nothing exploding below it as they hit ?

---

quote:

---

quote:
why is nothing exploding below it as they hit ?
I was wondering the same thing...

---

quote:

---

The first is that America is not as powerful as you think it is. It wasn’t as powerful as you thought it was in your first term, but its weakness is much more obvious now. 20 years in Afghanistan gave Taliban an air force. The Houthis kicked the US Navy out of the Red Sea. Niger ordered the US and NATO out. The blank check for Israel alienates the world. The dollar is losing ground. Yuge failure.

The second reality has come in the last four years. They’re not afraid of America any more. It’s not as scary, not as powerful and not as competent as they thought it was. It has dribbled away the reputation it had in 1945. Always at war, always losing. (Afghans! Houthis! Niger!) 800 bases around the world are 800 hostages. If American aircraft carriers don’t frighten the Houthis – why would they frighten China?

Ukraine exposed the fraud. American/NATO weapons are boutique weapons – expensive, fragile and produced in tiny quantities. As your new Secretary of Defense can tell you, your generals aren’t warriors – they’re bureaucrats with MBAs dreaming of becoming sales reps for the MIC. “As long as it takes” isn’t very long. Send more weapons? What’s left to send? The “game changers” are defeated. You don’t have a big stick.

---