General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsFrank Figliuzzi warns Russian jet bombers capable of nuclear missiles directly across from Alaska
Last edited Thu Aug 15, 2019, 10:53 AM - Edit history (1)
Yesterday on Nicolle Wallace's show former FBI Assistant Director for Counterintelligence Figlliuzzi said it was not getting enough attention that the Russians have now admitted and are bragging that they have two jet bombers that are capable of carrying multiple nuclear missiles at the farthest most part of Russia that is exactly opposite of Alaska. He believes the Russians are telling us we now have the ability and capability to send and deliver nuclear missiles your way.
I couldn't find the video, but I did find the Reuters article he referenced.
20 MINUTES FROM ALASKA
Russian government newspaper Rossiiskaya Gazeta said on its website on Wednesday that the TU-160s flight showed Moscows ability to base nuclear bombers within 20 minutes flight time from U.S. territory.
The distance from Anadyr to Alaska is less than 600 km (372 miles) - for the TU-160 that takes 20 minutes including take-off and gaining altitude, it said.
Moreover the capabilities of the missiles which the plane carries would allow it to launch them without leaving Russian airspace. If necessary, the bombers first target could be radar stations and the positions of interceptor missiles which are part of the U.S. missile defense system.
(link to article) https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-russia-bombers/russia-flies-nuclear-capable-bombers-to-region-facing-alaska-idUSKCN1V420D
EDIT: found the video (he discusses this at the 43min mark)
Dennis Donovan
(18,770 posts)...Although the USSR had Tu-95's at the ready with nukes during the Cold War, as we had B-52's at the ready, also with nukes.
I think the takeaway from this is we're on the cusp of a new Cold War, and our present POTUS is NO JFK...
democratisphere
(17,235 posts)Even Putin isn't stupid enough to start a nuclear war with the US. Looks like the Putin-drumpf bromance is in a shambles. Pitty.
Mike 03
(16,616 posts)We are sitting ducks. This administration is doing nothing about Russian aggression. A week or two ago CNN did a piece on how Russia is running amok in the Arctic. It's like we've told them, "Whatever you want to do is fine with us."
Renew Deal
(81,858 posts)sarisataka
(18,651 posts)And that means they now have the ability and capability to send and deliver nuclear missiles?
I wonder what those 300 or so Russian ICBMs the are for?
Bradical79
(4,490 posts)dem4decades
(11,289 posts)Bradical79
(4,490 posts)Last edited Thu Aug 15, 2019, 11:20 AM - Edit history (1)
But I'm not well educated on the nuclear treaties we had before.
Also, I'm not sure about the threat. If they nuked Alaska, wouldn't we just nuke them too? We both have more than enough to wipe each other off the face of the Earth. It's what MAD is all about. Seems to me how close they are to Alaska isn't particularly relevant. Am I wrong?
atreides1
(16,079 posts)With this president, do you think he'll order a retaliatory attack...especially after Putin apologizes, and convinces Trump that it was a mistake!
Trump is a coward...as are many in congress who support him...and that disease has spread to the Pentagon with the appointment of a knee pad wearing, former Raytheon man, in charge of the DOD.
Face it, we can't even count on the US military to support and defend the US Constitution...I'm a veteran and I don't believe that the military will do anything, except to stand at attention as they help to raise the flag of surrender...
marble falls
(57,081 posts)any given moment????? We're every bit a s close and maybe with twice as many.
https://besacenter.org/perspectives-papers/us-nuclear-weapons-turkey/
And our FBM submarines each hold up to 24 missiles with MIRV warheads of 3 to 10 bombs each up to 10 megatons each.
Progressive dog
(6,902 posts)there's a lot more to it than Alaska.