Russian Chief of Staff: Risk of Nuclear War Increasing

[bananas]

http://nuclearrisk.wordpress.com/2012/01/04/russian-chief-of-staff-risk-of-nuclear-war-increasing/

Russian Chief of Staff: Risk of Nuclear War Increasing
Posted on January 4, 2012

The following is an excerpt from Komsomolskaya Pravda, December 28, 2011, page 12: Addressing the Public House not long ago, Chief of the General Staff Nikolai Makarov announced that the probability of a war near the Russian borders, including a nuclear war, had greatly increased over the last several years. … Here is an interview with Mikhail Barabanov, Center for Analysis of Strategies and Techniques Assistant Director and Moscow Defense Brief Editor-in-Chief. …

Question: And what might cause these wars that will involve Russia?

Mikhail Barabanov: Major Western countries and first and foremost the United States might intervene in conflicts on the territory of the former Soviet Union. It will serve as casus belli. The countries that comprise the CIS Collective Security Treaty Organization belong to the zone of Russia’s strategic interests … vital interests. Should the United States or other NATO countries decide to try and get a foothold there, it will create conditions for direct clashes between their armies and the Russian Armed Forces. Things might escalate into a nuclear exchange, you know.

Question: And yet, why would Makarov mention nuclear weapons? Does it mean that the Russian army cannot rely on conventional forces alone?

Mikhail Barabanov: That the Russian military potential is way below those of the United States and NATO … and even China for that matter, is common knowledge. All NATO countries’ military budgets amounted to nearly $1.1 trillion in 2010 i.e. 25 times the Russian military budget. Numerical strength of their regular armies is approximately 3.6 million men or 3.5 times the numerical strength of the Russian Armed Forces. China’s military budget meanwhile amounted to $90 billion and numerical strength of the PLA to about 2.3 million men.

Question: And yet, Russia keeps aspiring to some sort of nuclear parity with the West.

Mikhail Barabanov: Yes, it is Russia’s nuclear weapons that place it on an equal footing with the United States and NATO. It follows that Russia just might resort to nuclear weapons against the vastly superior enemy. Moreover, the Russian military doctrine does stand for the use of nuclear weapons.

[Nihil]

1. Fair comment.

Swap the names and it could have come straight out of the 1950s or 1960s
with the US spokesman claiming that they "just might resort to nuclear weapons
against the vastly superior enemy".

Maybe *this* will act as a little heads-up for Obama to stop f*cking around
and continuing the plutarchy's oil wars across the world ...? There again, on past
performance, I doubt it.




And no, I don't think this is the correct forum for it as this one didn't even
mention "energy" or "proliferation" or any of the other keywords that you like
to hide war-related posts behind but I'm used to reading misplaced posts by now!

[bananas]

2. Even a ‘small’ nuclear war would cause catastrophic climate change.

So, despite your opinion, this is the correct forum: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=115x310040

[bananas]

3. There is an environmentally-friendy nuclear weapon - the neutron bomb.

The inventor died just over a year ago: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x4639708

"It's the only nuclear weapon in history that makes sense in waging war. When the war is over, the world is still intact," he told the New York Times in September.

It also reduced the risk of long-term nuclear contamination as the neutrons dissipated quickly.