israel attacks gaza bound aid flotilla.

[3dot...]

we are stronger than the palestinians...yes I agree
but not the arab nation combined or Egypt alone...(which has nuclear power as well)

making it an arab/israel problem only suits israel. it's clearly a palestinian problem, though admittedly with some arab solidarity.

Egypt are pretty cosey with Uncle Sam, btw.

Egypt's army is all american equipped

[3dot...]

Egypt alone...(which has nuclear power as well)
and not Iran which is a militairy empire..(which contrary to what you may think.. has Russian Nuclear war-heads)

No, on both counts. The countries with nuclear weapons capabilities are, I believe, United States, United Kingdom, France, Russia, China, North Korea, India, Pakistan, and South Africa(?), and Israel undeclared and a non-signatory to the NNPT.

if south Africa and Russia have it.. Egypt has it...

the countries you are talking about have the ability to MANUFACTURE Nuclear bombs

[Machinesworking]

if south Africa and Russia have it.. Egypt has it...

My man, that's like saying, "if America and the UK have it, Saudi Arabia has it."
Which just isn't the case.

At most all it means is if you "preemptively struck" Egypt you might have to deal with Russia.
The same way you would have to deal with the USA if you struck Saudi Arabia.
I understand you have reason to be paranoid, but that's over the top.

[3dot...]

^^^ nope.. not really paranoid.. realistic

[Machinesworking]

^^^ nope.. not really paranoid.. realistic

Right because Russia will immediately sell it's top weapons to anybody?
Is that the logic you're using, because it's not clear why you think what you do.

If that is your reasoning, it is paranoid, common projection for sure, but still irrational.

[3dot...]

Following the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991, a number of Soviet-era nuclear warheads remained on the territories of Belarus, Ukraine, and Kazakhstan. Under the terms of the Lisbon Protocol to the NPT, and following the 1995 Trilateral Agreement between Russia, Belarus, and the USA, these were transferred to Russia, leaving Russia as the sole inheritor of the Soviet nuclear arsenal. It is estimated that the USSR had approximately 39,000 nuclear weapons stockpiled at the time of its collapse.

The collapse of the Soviet Union allowed for a warming of relations with NATO. Fears of a nuclear holocaust lessened. In September 1997, the former secretary of the Russian Security Council Alexander Lebed claimed 100 "suitcase sized" nuclear weapons were unaccounted for. He said he was attempting to inventory the weapons when he was fired by President Boris Yeltsin in October 1996.[14] In 2005, Sergey Sinchenko, a legislator from the Yulia Tymoshenko Bloc, said 250 nuclear weapons were unaccounted for. When comparing documents of nuclear weapons transferred from Ukraine to weapons received by Russia, there was a 250-weapon discrepancy.[15] Indeed, several US politicians have expressed worries and promised legislation addressing the threat.[16]

In 2002, the United States and Russia agreed to reduce their stockpiles to not more than 2200 warheads each in the SORT treaty. In 2003, the US rejected Russian proposals to further reduce each nation's nuclear stockpiles to 1500. Russia, in turn, refused to discuss reduction of tactical nuclear weapons.[12]

Russia is actively producing and developing new nuclear weapons. Since 1997 it manufactures Topol-M (SS-27) ICBMs.

There were allegations that Russia contributed to North Korean nuclear program, selling it the equipment for the safe storage and transportation of nuclear materials.[17] Nevertheless, Russia condemned Korean nuclear tests since then.[18]

According to high-ranking Russian SVR defector Tretyakov, a businessman told him that he keeps his own nuclear bomb at his dacha outside Moscow. [19].

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russia_and ... llegations

[Machinesworking]

Don't normally pull this one in internet chat, but here it applies,
IMO it's best not to live life based on fears with no actual evidence.
Russia is to this day still a "suspect" nation to most western powers, there is
no doubt substantial political gain to be had with erroneous claims of wrongdoing by the ex communist military state.
It's commonly thought that Israel has nuclear weapons by it's opponents for instance.


allegation |?ali?g? sh ?n|
noun
a claim or assertion that someone has done something illegal or wrong, typically one made without proof : he made allegations of corruption against the administration | allegations that the army was operating a shoot-to-kill policy.

Following the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991, a number of Soviet-era nuclear warheads remained on the territories of Belarus, Ukraine, and Kazakhstan. Under the terms of the Lisbon Protocol to the NPT, and following the 1995 Trilateral Agreement between Russia, Belarus, and the USA, these were transferred to Russia, leaving Russia as the sole inheritor of the Soviet nuclear arsenal. It is estimated that the USSR had approximately 39,000 nuclear weapons stockpiled at the time of its collapse.

The collapse of the Soviet Union allowed for a warming of relations with NATO. Fears of a nuclear holocaust lessened. In September 1997, the former secretary of the Russian Security Council Alexander Lebed claimed 100 "suitcase sized" nuclear weapons were unaccounted for. He said he was attempting to inventory the weapons when he was fired by President Boris Yeltsin in October 1996.[14] In 2005, Sergey Sinchenko, a legislator from the Yulia Tymoshenko Bloc, said 250 nuclear weapons were unaccounted for. When comparing documents of nuclear weapons transferred from Ukraine to weapons received by Russia, there was a 250-weapon discrepancy.[15] Indeed, several US politicians have expressed worries and promised legislation addressing the threat.[16]

In 2002, the United States and Russia agreed to reduce their stockpiles to not more than 2200 warheads each in the SORT treaty. In 2003, the US rejected Russian proposals to further reduce each nation's nuclear stockpiles to 1500. Russia, in turn, refused to discuss reduction of tactical nuclear weapons.[12]

Russia is actively producing and developing new nuclear weapons. Since 1997 it manufactures Topol-M (SS-27) ICBMs.

There were allegations that Russia contributed to North Korean nuclear program, selling it the equipment for the safe storage and transportation of nuclear materials.[17] Nevertheless, Russia condemned Korean nuclear tests since then.[18]

According to high-ranking Russian SVR defector Tretyakov, a businessman told him that he keeps his own nuclear bomb at his dacha outside Moscow. [19].

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russia_and ... llegations

I mean seriously, how third hand can the information be before it's considered just scare tactics by the military establishments on opposing sides?

[3dot...]

yeah... but that's a 50/50... and is not unfounded
..in this case... the mere possibility counts as though it real..

...I wasn't talking about North Korea..(that's a sure thing)
I was talking about the high probability that more than 1000 warheads from the late USSR..are missing..
and are sold at the black market
this is not unfounded allegations

you call it paranoid

[Machinesworking]

yeah... but that's a 50/50... and is not unfounded
..in this case... the mere possibility counts as though it real..

Can't argue with the lack of evidence you're basing your thinking on... but don't expect me to think
for an instance a true/false allegation immediately means a 50/50 chance, bad logic is bad there.

I was talking about the high probability that more than 1000 warheads from the late USSR..are missing..
and are sold at the black market
this is not unfounded allegations

Possible threats are not a good thing to base a policy of overkill on.

Worrying about the possibility of a potential threat, basing a dependance on a military industrial complex on that possibility, is
what got Russia bankrupt in the first place, and us in Iraq with zero exit strategy , and you guys in Gaza and the West Bank.....
The list goes on of countries making awful decisions based on potential threats rather than solid factual evidence.