The Twlight of Civilization. - Page 4

Flatbutt1 · 06-05-2007, 05:25 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by jyl
Fortified shelter at the end of 10 miles of nearly impassable road, deep in the woods, lined with cameras and boobytraps. Quicksand and snakes. Food, water, guns, ammunition, medicines. A platoon of killer dogs with their vocal cords removed. Backed up by hundreds of rabid killer paratroop squirrels.

I live within 3 miles of Picatinny Arsenal. If it goes I go ..so no survivalist camp for me.

jyl · jyl's Garage

Quote:

Originally posted by Joeaksa
You and SloPat would get along very well...

Until the cannibalism . . .

tabs · 06-05-2007, 10:21 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by MRM
You guys misunderstand what I am saying about Korea. Russia wasn't considering nuking the battle front in Korea, Stalin was considering a first strike on the US mainland.

Khrushchev was overthrown in 1964 by a cabal of Stalin's young stars, Brezhnev, Kosygin . . . "

Stalin The Court of the Red Tsar. Simon Sebag Montefiore, 2003. History Book of the Year - UK, 2004.

And exactly how was Stalin going to get the Bomb to America in 1950? This I got to hear...

"Stalins YOUNG STARS" .... Thats a joke. Stalin didn't share the limelight, the way U survived in Stalins Russia was to be anonymous, self effacing never uttering a squeak. Otherwise it was a bullet in the back of the head in Lubeanka administerd by Stalins boy Beria.

Krushev based upon his meeting with Kennedy in Vienna in1961 decided that he was dealing wqith a weak little Boy of a President. Based upon that assement Mr K took the gamble and put Medium Range Ballistic and Short Range Tactical Missles in Cuba. Kennedy much to his credit resisted the temptation of using military force to take out the missles. Istead he used back channel diplomatic contacts and he enacted a Naval Blockcade. This restraint on JFKs part saved the world from a Nuclear war, in that the Soviets had Tactical Nuclear weapons which WOULD have been used, this was unbeknownst to the US until after the fall of the UUSR. Yes this was about as close of a thing as it came. It was after this that the Hot Line was institiuted. With the world sitting on the edge, leaders had to be able to talk to one another directly.

Again in June of 1967 the US and USSR CAME VERY CLOSE TO NUCLEAR WAR. During the 6 Day War the Soviets came very close to intervening on the part of the Arabs. LBJ dissuaded them from making that move.

MRM · 06-05-2007, 01:06 PM

The Soviet Union had one way bomber capabilities to deliver nukes to the US as early as 1950. Of course he did not have the overwhelming ability to obliterate the country that the Soviets had once ICBMs were fully deployed, but how many nuclear bombs does it take to do permanent damage?

Stalin created a "new class" of stars, to borrow Dijas' apt term. He made and unmade proteges constantly. It wasn't him and Beria executing millions by themselves, they needed a large loyal Checka to accomplish it. Stalin judged his men by the loyalty they showed, which he measured by the amount of blood they were willing to spill. By this standard Khrushchev, Brezhnev, Kosygin all excelled. It is no accident that these young stars who survived Stalin were all 40 years younger than him, which is probably why they lived to be "young stars".

You are absolutely correct on your interpretation of the CMC. Khrushchev met Kennedy and was so sure that he was a callow rich boy who was so far out of his depth that Khrushchev could push him around. Kennedy sure made his share of mistakes, but the CMC was not one of them, other than failing to project strength to Mr. K. Yet another reason to wish Richard Nixon was elected in 1960 instead of Kennedy.

Since you're an expert on Beria, for extra credit, how long did Beria survive Stalin?

red-beard · red-beard's Garage

The long range bombers that the Soviets had in 1950 were modified B-29's. Sabers would have taken them out over Canada.

tabs · 06-05-2007, 01:33 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by red-beard
The long range bombers that the Soviets had in 1950 were modified B-29's. Sabers would have taken them out over Canada.

And how many of those Long Range Bombers did U say they had again?

red-beard · red-beard's Garage

Yep, those were the days when the Soviets would fly the same squadron of planes over a parade, over and over again, to make it seem like they had a fleet of the planes.

tabs · 06-05-2007, 01:44 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by MRM
Since you're an expert on Beria, for extra credit, how long did Beria survive Stalin?

He survived Stalins Funeral but not long enough for the Will to be read. ....and had delusions of taking over which were cut short by by Mr K. Not exactly sure of the time frame probably about a month or so. Then he too met with a bullet in the back of the head in the Lubeanka. One of the first things Mr K did was to denounce Stalin and his tactics.

U do realize that the Soviet Union only fell after ALL the old boys who were brought up under Stalin had left the scene. With the exception of Gromeko. That means that once the learned patterns of fear and intimidation as the means to govern were no longer instilled in the Leadership the place fell.

MRM · 06-05-2007, 03:51 PM

Yes. The correct answer is about a week. They did read Stalin's will by then, of course the cabal stole it out of his safe before he was dead, but Beria was disposed of before the public reading. If they hadn't gotten him first he would have taken power and the blood would have really ran.

I don't know how many B-29s the Soviets had back then, but probably several hundred. They had the nasty habbit of not returning them if we lost one in their territory during WWII. They just copied the B-29 for their first long range bombers. Even if the Sabres took them all out over Canada the danger would have been that we would have felt obligated to make a counter strike. I'm glad that even a delusional Stalin thought better of it.

Having one bomber circle the field really did happen but that was a jet that never materialized quite a bit later. It made the CIA think we were facing a much greater threat and occupied our air defense for a decade. Oh well.

tabs · 06-05-2007, 09:52 PM

In the late 50s it was ascertained that the Soviets had only 40 Backfire Bombers. So as it turned out the Soviets in reality had very little in which to reach the Continential US with.

tabs · 06-05-2007, 09:59 PM

What the Soviets had was a lot of Tanks, Tactical Aircraft and a hugh Army. The sophistication and amount of hardware the US had at its disposal actually dwarfed what the Soviets would have been able to throw at the US. This was a case of fear and paranoia on the part of the US military establishment.

Eisenhower correctly assed the actual threat the Soviets posed. At the end of his term he said, "Beware of the military industrial complex." Kennedy forever being afraid of being labeled soft on Communism increased the US military budget to astronomical heights.

MRM · 06-06-2007, 04:21 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by tabs
In the late 50s it was ascertained that the Soviets had only 40 Backfire Bombers. So as it turned out the Soviets in reality had very little in which to reach the Continential US with.

Alert the CIA. They're still suffering under the delusion that the Backfire Bomber wasn't manufactured until 1969 and wasn't deployed until 1972. Perhaps you are thinking of the TU-22 Blinder or TU-16 Badger.

In any event, as I stated, the Soviets had plenty of piston aircraft available for one-way nuclear delivery in 1950 and one generalissimo almost crazy enough to launch them.

tabs · 06-06-2007, 11:24 AM

They didn't have "PLENTY" of piston aircraft for strategic bombing. Your still under the delusion that the Soviets were allmighty in the 1950s, they weren't. That is convient myth for the Defense Contractors and military.

Like I said, regardless of the type they only had about 40 Long Range Bombers in the late 50s. So its no wonder Stalin thought twice about testing the USA.

tabs · 06-06-2007, 11:32 AM

BTW...Stalin was no Generalissmo..that is another convient myth that Stalin liked everybody to think. Left on his own Stalin military prowness would have led to defeat at the hands of the Germans. In other words he was a complete diaster. Stalin just had a bit more common sense than Hitler, he grudgingly listened to his Generals. Zhuchov in paticular, and as a reward after the war Zhuchov was put in command of Siberia. Stalin thought it should be he in the limelight and not Zhuchov, that he was the Great Savior of Mother Russia.

MRM · 06-06-2007, 05:42 PM

Um, Tabs, Generalissimo was Stalin's formal title.

tabs · 06-06-2007, 06:45 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by MRM
Um, Tabs, Generalissimo was Stalin's formal title.

Yeah Like I said it was how Stalin wanted himself to be seen...it doesn't mean that it was true. For 2 weeks after the Germans invaded Stalin laid in bed, not seeing anyone. It was only when the other members of the Polit Bureau came that he got up. At first he thought they were there to depose him. At first he wouldn't even belive that the Germans had invade and ordered the troops no to fire back. For the first year Stalin ran the show militarily with diaster after diaster. Then after the Battle of Kharov Stalin started to listen to his generals, and the rest is history.

Mo_Gearhead · 06-10-2007, 07:44 PM

Well Cashflyer pegged it! Everyone is so concerned about terrorists when they should know that the earth's magnetic poles are about to change! The earths axis will shift. Talk about your climate change!!! Japan disappears in the sea. Florida, Washington, New York, citys on east coast ...all gone. December 2012.

What happens when ALL the electricity goes off, nationwide? No ATMS, no refrigeration, no computers, no cell phones, no cable TV, no radio, no gas pumps, commerce comes to a halt, etc. Consider what in your life ISN"T powered by the flow of those pesky electrons.

We've been fighting 17 century thinking Muslems ...we could be back there ourselves.

Must be true (I saw it on the history channel!)