The ORIGINAL gathering place for a merry band of Three Percenters. (As denounced by Bill Clinton on CNN!)
My instincts say this is a good thing. While they are in virtually no danger from us, they do have lots of terrorists running around in former Soviet republics. remember the Moscow theater? And the school attack? And their former republics are considered to be the best source for a terrorist group to get either nuclear material, or even a bomb. And much easier to transport to Russia than here. Probably a good idea for us to bring back a similar program. How many kids today have any idea of what to do during a nuclear, chemical, or gas attack?
"Dmitry Rogozin, the deputy prime minister in charge the defense industry, said the United States was upsetting the nuclear balance by developing new weapons systems."Okay, I call B.S. on that. It isn't recent U.S. weapon systems developments that are upsetting the current nuclear balance (such as it is). The call for civil defense training is similarly disingenuous. While the Russians may find it useful to impose such a program to help condition their populace to think of America as an existential threat, and it might actually save a few lives in the very unlikely event of an actual nuclear exchange, he doesn't seriously believe in the danger.However, it is a genuine and upsetting signal that the Russian government has no intention of attempting to resolve current tensions through honest negotiation. They are preparing to continue to escalate this military conflict as far as necessary to destroy the U.S. led global security structure. And Beijing, needless to say, is backing that play to the hilt. A lot of the developing world will follow their lead, and while that may not matter much militarily it will matter a hell of a lot to the Western nations' economics.
"I guess they know something we refuse to recognize."Yeah, like how to include the peons in a civil defense plan,MikeH.A Geriatric Threeper
As far as I know, the Russians have invested huge sums in civil defense since the 40s and the investments are still present. Investments such as real fallout shelters in handy locations that are well stocked and can hold hundreds of people in every city. They just have to train a few generations of people how to function in that kind of scenario. Also, the Russians had the doctrine of having a spread out manufacturing and population base along with that serious civ defense effort. What this means is the west would have to lob hundreds or thousands of warheads to actually reduce the Russian gdp and population any whereas the Russians could lob say 50 warheads and destroy most of the US manufacturing and population. I wonder what lunatic will go down in history as having started ww2. Also please note that even when US civ defense was making the motions it was nowhere near being a real, usefull effort. We will be truly on our own, prayer will be the only recourse.
I visited Russia twice, in 1997 and 2002. I asked my Russian hosts about the fallout shelters. They responded that, under Soviet law, each apartment building had to have one large enough for the residents. The shelters were initially well stocked, but over the years they had been broken into and robbed of anything that wasn't bolted down. (Typically Russian!) On the date of my visit, the shelter was just a quiet place to die. I did not see prominent "Fallout Shelter" signs on buildings like we had here in the '50s. I was told Soviet authorities did not want the kind of public anxiety we had here in the early '60s, so preparations were kept low key, and with a government monopoly on media that was easy to do.One thing the Soviet Union did, however, was train its children. High school boys had mandatory rifle shooting lessons and girls were taught how to reload AK mags and throw grenades. This was a society that had learned the lessons of preparedness the hard way in 1941.
Post a Comment