Snarky remarks about Obama don’t enter into this though I am sure that will be most of the replies. Nearly the entire Russian strategic missile force was built and deployed before the fall of the USSR. They are years beyond their shelf life. Reliability and maintenance must be a nightmare.
NY Times editorial writers may be impressed by the raw numbers of launchers but to the professional soldiers in the US, France, and China, Russia can stay in the superpower club only by a large rebuilding program. The question I wonder about is affordability. The USSR couldn’t afford the old arms programs and I question if the new Russia can either.
Putin bluster aside can they actually pay for such a program. Even before the oil price drops Russia’s economy was less then the UK or even California. 21st century weapons aren’t cheap.
Putin has starved his people to death before to afford weapons, not likely he'll change. It appears to me from recent speeches coming from the Kremlin, that Russia feels they will be dealing with a limp noodle new president and will do what they please, when they please, as long as they please, and fully intend to get away with it. Not good for the home team. imo
best regards, blu
An arms race they couldn’t afford drove the Commies under once; shall we go for two?
BHO, are you reading this? Do you see the consequences of wanting so desperately to be loved by those so unworthy of our supplication?
They are no different than ours.
Our strategic missile force now consists of the Minuteman III which was developed through the 60's and early 70's.
With just a stage washout program (new propellant pour) back in the 80's and a new one occurring now our systems are still much older and at least a generation behind what the Russians have even now.
Lets not even get into the issue of the aging of our warheads.