I was in the Marine Air Wing from 1968-1972 and remember the MIG-21 when it was developed and could out speed, out turn, carry better weapons than anything we had and there was a fervor to develop new technology to stop the threat because as today " we could not afford to be wrong". Then a Russian pilot defected flying a MIG-21 to one of our bases in Japan and as we took apart the aircraft and examined its capabilities we realized none of the claims were true, the plane was far inferior to anything we had at the time.
The claim Putin has made seems to be just another boast that cannot be proven and has not even been tracked by any observations by the American government. Russia still depends on America to get enough food. Wouldn't make sense to destroy your food supply.
If the Russians have such weapons, will use the weapons or is just trying to get America to spend more money on its tools of war is an interesting question without much information to get an answer. If such weapons exist and the leader does intend to use them why declare your capabilities, simply use them and take over the world!!

Well written as always:)
Personally I have worried more about some idiot gangbanger than being nuked. But in the last 2 decades I have worried about our treasonous leaders as much as the violent criminals. Yet Another example of Bushes crime cartel, squandering the laughable peace dividend.

Is Putin bluffing? He's a product of the Soviet KGB, and misdirection and prevarication were standard tools used to keep the West off balance. I feel frustrated that I'm retired and without those high level clearances that made it possible to view and analyze the space based sensors and high resolution radar that showed the real capabilities of Soviet missiles. I've been out of the game for more than a decade, but even with the systems we had back then, I'd say that even if the Russians do have the hypersonic, maneuvering warheads he claims, they aren't as able to evade defenses as he thinks.

A hypersonic body traveling in the atmosphere leaves an unmistakable, very bright glowing infrared trail easily detectable by the U.S. space based sensors. Because there are a number of these sensors with overlapping fields of view, a three dimensional track can be developed for targeting. The flaw in Putin's thinking is that his missile will be able to evade mid course defenses, where the hypersonic warhead can't maneuver.

In any event, once a track shows a trajectory that is U.S. bound, a counterattack will immediately follow. The "Star Wars" ABM concept never was a commitment to hold fire, waiting to see if any ICBMs got through our defense. It was intended to help us survive by minimizing the damage from an enemy strike.

As Russia developed new weapons, Obama's "Lead from behind" philosophy provided us with a handful of nothing. Behind is behind and there is no leadership at the back of the http://line.No matter how much we deny it, we can only lead through power. It is the most powerful nation that other nations listen to and respect. We must decide whether the world is better off being led by America or China. Because in the current geopolitics that'sway, that's the way it is. If our decision that we will make the better leader, then we must be powerful to wear that mantle.

Perhaps I was over influenced by Orwell's 1984 but continuous, limited wars between superpowers for no purpose other than keeping their own citizens in check dominates my thinking on this. Posturing, bragging, threatening and fearmongering keep the public in a distracted state while a ruling class runs amok. This game is, of course, very dangerous because someone that believes the rhetoric may get antsy and push the button.

I don't see the point of even trying to survive a nuclear holocaust for either the winner or loser. The war I would hate to see us lose and most want to see us win is the war of ideas. Regardless of the name of the "ism", the struggle for individual rights seems to be the only battle that is worth winning and our defensive and offensive preparations are scarily inept. Whoever wins the war of ideas will have all of the accomplishments of the ages at their disposal, not a burnt out, radioactive cinder.

I'll retain a healthy dose of skepticism about many of the aerial vehicle claims, thank you. The simple fact is that anything going as fast as Putin is claiming (Mach 10 or above) can't maneuver at all - the stresses would literally rip the missile apart. The other problem is an engine that can actually generate that kind of thrust over such a short time frame - and not rip the missile apart from the inside. If Putin's Russia has in fact solved these two materials engineering problems, then why don't we see any of the derivative technologies in any of their military aircraft?

With regards to the underwater vehicles, I read a separate story and the overall speed of these is only slightly faster than a standard torpedo. The more dangerous aspect - again if true - is the supposed depth of operation - significantly below where normal submarines operate. That being said, with the sonobuoy lines - literally laid along the ocean floor - which currently stretch from Great Britain to Iceland and Iceland to Greenland, Russia isn't going to be able to launch one of these without us knowing about it - if they even exist.

Great article, but I'm going to say that until we have independent verification that these weapons actually exist, I'm not going to spend sleepless nights worrying about them.

Putin wants to make the Russian Federation into the same powerful force that the Soviet Union was. Its pretty simple. He is essentially a dictator who is concerned about his peresonal power, and those of his minions (sound familiar in the USA?). He learned that the ability to render the offensive weapons of the opposing forces impotent is what brought down the power of the Soviet system. He wants to do that today.

The whole idea of having nuclear forces balanced between USA and Russia does in fact insure that they will never be used- Unless one side is able to negate the power of the other.

This MADD idea is a constantly evolving thing, as each side tries to develop ways around it. Sounds like Russia has been working feverishly on this for awhile now, and we have not. Maybe the development of advanced EMP weapons would be the way to go and let Russia just implode as their civilization crumbles. We would have to make sure they didnt use those on us of course.

nothing good about any of this...enjoy your life my friend...

If this all is true, we will soon learn of lifted sanctions against Russia.

Me dino read somewhere that Putin is up for reelection. The story was about a competing male candidate punching a competing female candidate in the face.
Anyhoo, announcing all these nifty new high tech Let's Play World War Three toys strikes me dino as very well-timed.
But does me dino think Putin has any chance of losing his yet another reelection? Nyet!
Putin in the past has proven capable of doing more than just punching another Russian in the face.

My possibly-wrong understanding: I thought it was nearly impossible to stop ICBM-carried weapons using existing technology and that fact made MAD possible. Russia or US have no incentive to relinquish their weapons because deterrent is their only "defense". Similarly, they have no incentive to produce more powerful weapons since the weapons are so devastating a single one can destroy and entire city.

If my possibly-naive view is right, why does it matter if Russia has new nuclear weapons? They already have a very solid deterrent. I thought even if US initiated a first-strike without warning and were expecting a retaliatory strike, Russia could still kill millions of people, destroy infrastructure and assets on a massive scale, and have much of the US population scrambling for basic necessities.

Does your post suggest I'm wrong about this? Do you think Russia thinks (possibly correctly) that US military technology has gotten to the point where some in the US might think a nuclear war is winnable?