Voices from Russia

Saturday, 6 April 2013

6 April 2013. RIA-Novosti Infographics. Where Can DPRK Missiles Strike?

00 RIA-Novosti Infographics. Where Can DPRK Missiles Strike. 2013


The DPRK leadership is ready to use nuclear weapons against the USA if they’re provoked. We show you the range of the various missiles and the main strategic objects in the DPRK in our Infographic.

5 April 2013



Missiles in the DPRK Inventory:

R-17 8K14 SRBM

Hwasong-5 SRBM

R-17 8K14/ER SRBM

Hwasong-6 SRBM


Rodong-1 MRBM

Taepodong-1 ICBM

BM25 Musudan IRBM

Taepodong-2 ICBM

Taepodong-3 ICBM



Thursday, 6 September 2012

Putin Sez US Military Won’t Let Obama Get Flexible on Missile Shield


President Vladimir Putin said US President Barack Obama is willing to revive deadlocked talks on a planned American missile shield in Europe, but that the military lobby in Congress and a “conservative” State Department are holding him back. Putin told the RT international news channel in an interview, “Is it possible to find a solution to the problem, if President Obama’s re-elected for a second term? In principle, yes, it is. Nevertheless, this isn’t just about President Obama. My feeling is that he’s a sincere man and that he sincerely wants to implement positive change. However, can he do it; will they let him do it? There’s the military lobby, and the Department of State, which is quite conservative”. Putin also emphasised the need for dialogue on the controversial shield, but said he was “not sure” that Washington was “ready for this kind of cooperation”.

Negotiations between Russia and the USA on the missile defence project stalled over Washington’s reluctance to give Moscow legally-binding guarantees that it won’t use the shield against Russia. Washington and NATO say they need the shield to defend Europe against a possible missile attack from Iran. Russia says the project could pose a threat to its national security and threatened a host of countermeasures. In May, the Russian General Staff said it didn’t rule out a pre-emptive strike against the American shield in the event of an “aggravation of the situation”.

Earlier this week, the US Democratic Party said in its 2012 national platform that if re-elected, President Obama would “move forward” with the missile shield programme, regardless of Moscow’s stance. However, Putin told RT that a unilateral move would “not enhance global stability”. He added that Russia would “have to think of how we can defend ourselves” if the United States proceeded with the shield, saying, “You also have to think about its strategic character, even if it’s built not for a year or even a decade”. He also said chances that a figure like Obama’s Republican challenger Mitt Romneywho famously described Russia as the United States’ “number one geopolitical foe”… could come to power in the USA were “quite high”, asking, “So, what are we supposed to do to ensure our security?”

In 2010, Obama scrapped the previous Bush administration‘s plans to deploy an anti-ballistic missile defence system in Czechia and Poland, in a move welcomed by Moscow. However, later, Washington announced it’d replace it with a reconfigured system that they’d eventually deploy in the Mediterranean, Poland, Romania, and Turkey.

6 September 2012



Editor’s Note:

There are no planned ABM sites in CONUS. NONE. That means that the rhetoric that ABM forces are “defensive” is lies. Iran is no threat to Europe or the USA in the near or middle future. Indeed, it’s hard to see it being a threat in the far future (a generation from now). In short, it’s all a gigantic lie… it’s actually an attempt to try to decapitate the Russian strategic offensive forces.

The USA, unfortunately for it, believes its own propaganda. No ABM system can destroy all outgoing missiles. Under current plans, there are no ABM sites in CONUS to protect American cities from re-entry vehicles of ICBMs that evade the (rather leaky) ABM net. In short, it’s a massive boondoggle… a cornucopia of corruption and boodle for defence contractors and their One Percent investors. You see, the Eurasian ABM deployments would be reachable by Russian SRBMs… and their flight-time is so short that the ABM interceptors would be useless against them.

That is, the USA is playing with hand grenades with the pins pulled out. If the last twenty years have taught us anything, it’s that the USA is a reckless rouge state, especially under Republican rule. The USA didn’t learn a lesson when the Russians handily defeated their Georgian clients in ’08… they remain juvenile bullies. The only good thing is that so-called ABM defence is unfeasible technically and unaffordable financially (the Bush wars and tax cuts saw to that).

God save the world from the USA.


Thursday, 17 May 2012

17 May 2012. RIA-Novosti Infographics. World’s First Intercontinental Ballistic Missile


16 May 2012



Tuesday, 19 October 2010

A View from Moscow by Valentin Zorin… “Reboot” and ABM Defence


The “reboot” of Russian-American relations is showing some promise. One of the first steps in this process was when President Obama renounced a favourite plan of his predecessor, George Bush, to deploy American missiles in close proximity to the Russian frontier in Poland and Czechia. That cleared the way for settling other important problems in our bilateral relations. Preparations for signing a new Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty got off the ground at last, and, after difficult negotiations, eventually resulted in an agreement signed by Presidents Dmitri Medvedev and Barack Obama in Prague in May 2010. However, as it became clear shortly afterward, in Washington politics at least, the issue is not so simple and straightforward. At the end of September, Bucharest announced that it was getting ready to sign an agreement on the deployment of American missile bases in Romania, and a similar base was planned for Bulgaria. As it happens, instead of Poland, Romania will be the site of the missile bases, and Bulgaria will host the radar sites, instead of Czechia. Nevertheless, a change of location makes no difference as far as the result is concerned. Given the situation, the American moves cause as much concern as before.

Commenting on the situation, Prime Minister Vladimir Putin said, “We discussed our stance on the topic of the missile defence of Europe at length, and, apparently, had an agreement that there would be no ABM missile bases in Poland or Czechia. That was great! Then, all of a sudden, we learned that the US declared that it was moving its missiles to other European countries. So, where is the ‘reboot’?” This is a reasonable question. Amongst other questions, one of the things that was brought up in connection with the missile defence programme is how long is the United States is going to drag its feet over ratifying the new START Treaty. Signed in May, the US Senate was supposed to ratify the treaty by the middle of September. Now, as we come to the end of the first ten days of October, the opponents of the treaty are preventing ratification from going ahead by linking it to missile defence. Senator Richard Lugar (R-IN) said a few days ago that the Senate should add an amendment to the treaty with a special resolution stating that it imposes no restrictions on American plans to develop a missile defence system.

Powerful lobbies in the USA have doggedly pursued a missile defence programme ever since President Ronald Reagan launched it 25 years ago. Moreover, the intensity of their commitment to such a project continues unabated, despite substantial and fundamental failures and losses. One of the latest failures, which cost the USA 120 million dollars (3.69 billion Roubles 87.156 million Euros 76.368 million UK Pounds), occurred recently at an air force base in California, when an interceptor missile failed to hit a hypothetical target and exploded in mid-air. Professor Richard Garwin, whom many consider as one of the fathers of the American thermonuclear bomb programme, gave an authoritative opinion on it when he spoke in the US Senate recently; he said, “The American missile defence system in its current incarnation is simply useless, we have to rethink it”.

Auditors from the GAO came to an equally frustrated and disappointing conclusion. They admitted that the so-called missile defence experts failed to achieve the desired results despite the huge price tag, and that the system they did build was a total bungle. The sums allocated for the ABM defence programme were astronomical. Experts estimate that the government spent over one trillion dollars (30.746 trillion Roubles 726 billion Euros 636 billion UK Pounds) during the years of the existence of the project, and it will require hundreds of billions more if continued. This explains why the masterminds of American ABM defence have persevered so mulishly in its pursuit, regardless of common sense. They didn’t invest the hundreds of billions of dollars earmarked for missile defence into space research as promised, but it migrated into the bank accounts of those who turned it into a gold mine. These people have much power and influence in present-day Washington. Whether American policymakers will remain hostage to these mighty groups remains to be seen.

5 October 2010

Valentin Zorin

Voice of Russia World Service


Editor’s Note:

The Tea Party has NO positive programme… they are mere obstructionists. For instance, the Republicans refused to ratify the START Treaty… they expect Russia to stay quiescent in the face of American (neocon) provocations. Let me assure you, any US ABM missile or radar sites would be the targets of Russian MRBMs in case of a crisis (the range involved is short enough that no ABM could be launched against them, they’re only effective against long-range ICBMs). That’s why, eventually, no European country will take such forces onto their territory.

Reflect on this… the Tea Party has no real existence, it’s a stalking horse used by rightwing Republican nutters (truly, it’s the last stand of the Bull Connors), and they use it to advance the same GOP nostrums that landed us in the economic depression we are in at present. That is, the Tea Party supports:

  • A pointless and unending war in Afghanistan
  • Spending billions on an ABM system that doesn’t and can never work
  • The maintenance of secret CIA torture facilities in compliant client states (Lithuania and the Ukraine kicked ‘em out, but that leaves Latvia, Estonia, Croatia, Albania, and Bosnia as willing running-dog lackey suckers)
  • The “export” of American jobs via “outsourcing”
  • The turnover of the entire US healthcare system to HMOs and insurance companies, with no restrictions on their operations
  • The dismantling of all regulations on banks and investment houses (thus, clearing the way for suffering that would put the Great Depression in the shade)
  • The pointless and endless “War on Drugs” and “War on Terror” (and they wish to add a third and fourth, a “War on Abortion” and a “War on Homosexuals”)
  • The abolition of inheritance taxes to favour the richest amongst us
  • The destruction of the governmental social safety net
  • The ending of all government regulations on labour, business, the environment, and transportation

Any questions? I didn’t think so…



Blog at WordPress.com.