# Russia: Return of the Cold War



## BloodStripe (Mar 1, 2018)

This morning Putin delivered the Russia equivalent to the State of the Union Address. During part of it he essentially put the US back on notice that they are nuclear armed and we need to listen to them. They are also building up their stockpile of nuclear weapons as we are shrinking ours. Will this shift the tide in our nuclear program to grow, especially since our current POTUS is already threatening NK? 

I personally would like to see an increase in our cyber programs. We know countries like Russia and NK are expanding in that arena and with everything requiring some type of connectivity, you can't nuke your way out of everything.


----------



## Gunz (Mar 1, 2018)

NavyBuyer said:


> ...I personally would like to see an increase in our cyber programs. We know countries like Russia and NK are expanding in that arena and with everything requiring some type of connectivity, *you can't nuke your way out of everything*.



You can't nuke your way out of anything against a major power without MAD. Building stockpiles of nukes only leads to bigger stockpiles. Once you and your adversary have enough to incinerate half the planet, it becomes a kind of pointless stalemate.

With cyber warfare you eliminate the unpleasantness of megadeaths and long-term radiation...and theoretically can do crippling damage.


----------



## CQB (Mar 1, 2018)

You’ve left out China.


----------



## Poccington (Mar 1, 2018)

CQB said:


> You’ve left out China.



Particularly important given that Xi has now dismantled the presidential term limits that previously existed. Him and China are in this for the long haul.


----------



## BloodStripe (Mar 1, 2018)

China is an interesting player for sure, but they aren't seen as our greatest WMD threat at the moment. 

Cyber side, yes. Russia, China, and quickly growing NK, are all adversaries that we should be watching out for.


----------



## Devildoc (Mar 1, 2018)

I tried to find it but I read a great article this week about this.  There is no surprise why the Russians have a hard-on for the US: after the wall fell, we should have done more to help them grow their new capitalist economy; we keep expanding NATO and wargaming against Russia; we have been opposed to just about every one of their foreign policy goals.  But after the Cold War when we (wrongly) thought we were all chummy and restructured out military and intelligence, they did not.  Every move the US made, they assumed had an anti-Russia undertone.


----------



## policemedic (Mar 1, 2018)

I’m with @Ocoka. At some point the number of nukes is moot. We’ve gone beyond that number, I think. If anyone launches we’ve all lost. 

Cyber is the front of the future.


----------



## Gunz (Mar 1, 2018)

Poccington said:


> Particularly important given that Xi has now dismantled the presidential term limits that previously existed. Him and China are in this for the long haul.



Yeah, that was a pretty illuminating development. They've even written his name into the constitution which gives his person and agenda a kind of Mao-like status...at least for now. We're gonna have to watch that motherfucker.



policemedic said:


> ...If anyone launches we’ve all lost...Cyber is the front of the future.



Yes and yes and add economic warfare after cyber.

With the possible exception of Pakistan, or some other nuke-capable third world shithole, nobody's going to nuke anybody else. The PRC doesn't want to nuke anybody, it's bad for business...and if the Chinese are anything, they are shrewd businesspeople. Putin, I think, aside from being a macho man, is nostalgic for the good old days of the Cold War, when he was in his prime. Honestly, I think that's part of his psychological profile.


----------



## Dienekes (Mar 1, 2018)

The recently released Nuclear Posture Review called out Russia in a big way, and began to pave the way for a more diverse nuclear arsenal. This could, in part, be a response to that.


----------



## SaintKP (Mar 1, 2018)

Sit down, grab a beer and put your feet up, this is going to be a long one.

As far as what I've been able to gather one of the sole reasons America is "lagging behind" now in terms of cyber space is due to the multitude of leaks that have occurred in the past 15+ years (Snowden, Shadow Brokers, Harold Martin, Kaspersky, Vault7, etc. ad nauseam). Even then, its less that we're falling behind and more of our rivals catching up through stolen Intel instead of through individual ingenuity. Look to China's fancy new stealth fighter which has _many _of the same characteristics that are individual to our own F35 for a prime example of our rivals paying "homage" to us.

In terms of a nuclear conflict, I sincerely believe it'll never occur outside of either a terror organization signing their own death warrant, or through human/computer error. At this point in human history I think all of the players know that if anyone decided to go ahead with a launch it would be the end of the world and no one would win.

What will most likely happen is continued micro wars between smaller states with background support through the big guys (Read: US, China, Russia). With "direct" conflict between said big guys occuring through economic and cyber warfare. I have no doubt that the US intelligence community will recover from this, with increased interest in recruiting in the various branches and not to mention the monumental embarrassments the NSA/CIA have suffered recently will increase funding and a drive for further advancement to get "back on top" so to speak.

In terms of Russia putting us on watch I believe it has more to do with China experiencing a surge in nationalism and militaristic interest unseen since Mao, Russia is looking to piggy back this new attitude and find someone to buddy up with so they can have support when it comes to confronting the US (i.e. trying to put us on watch). We're going to be seeing this attitude not only from China but from Russia for the foreseeable future, as previously stated Xi Jingping basically becoming president for life, and Putin moving to do the same with his latest act of essentially barring Alexei Navalny from even running. 

Looking to the future, it will be interesting to see what the successor of Jingping will do, especially considering his predecessor Hi Jintao abdicated all positions of power after his term was up and in all honesty Jingping is a complete outlier in terms of the presidents China has had. In addition to whether Putin can continue his grip on the political spectrum in Russia. 

In short, Russia while having made significant advancements in terms of cyber warfare and socio-political manipulation, is still playing second fiddle to China as well as fielding an outdated and quite frankly obsolete nuclear strategy. As long as Xi Jingping continues his strong rule and keeps advancing Chinese interests we'll continue to see Russia acting boldly. 

Apologies if this appears convoluted or confusing, tell me and I'll be more than happy to explain further.


----------



## Dienekes (Mar 1, 2018)

I agree with you on most of this, but I would like to hear more on your thoughts about Russia's obsolete military strategy. The US is so worried about their nuclear strategy that the new NPR specifically addressed their large and unaccounted-for arsenal of low-yield/non-strategic nuclear weapons.


----------



## SaintKP (Mar 1, 2018)

Dienekes said:


> I agree with you on most of this, but I would like to hear more on your thoughts about Russia's obsolete military strategy. The US is so worried about their nuclear strategy that the new NPR specifically addressed their large and unaccounted-for arsenal of low-yield/non-strategic nuclear weapons.




I meant that in terms of going for the old cold war strategy of building a stockpile of nuclear weapons, however, what's the likelihood of a nuclear conflict developing between us? In the Gun Control thread, @amlove21 explains his position and thinking in regards to the possibility of the US government confiscating all of the weapons in the US. Is it a possibility? Definitely. However, what are the actual odds of that happening? Like him I'm willing to put my money on never. 

Same concept applies to the possibility of a nuclear conflict occurring between the major powers, is it a possibility? Yeah. But same with this I'm willing to wager that it will never occur, and if for whatever reason it does. Then I guess I'll be eating crow while I die from radiation sickness (thanks Offut). In regards to NPR and other MSM outlets covering nuclear arms and warfare, is that nuclear anything will always have a boogeyman status, whether it be energy, weapons or warfare. 

At some point you have to decide what to actually devote your time and energy into worrying about and whether it's worth it or not, and in my opinion reliving a nuclear arms race, is one of the worst possible uses for our time.


----------



## Dienekes (Mar 1, 2018)

SaintKP said:


> In regards to NPR and other MSM outlets



NPR meaning Nuclear Posture Review as mentioned earlier. My bad for not specifying.


----------



## SaintKP (Mar 1, 2018)

Dienekes said:


> NPR meaning Nuclear Posture Review as mentioned earlier. My bad for not specifying.



No that's my fault, I haven't read it yet but downloading it now and I'll take a look. Still, going into it I feel like we have to realistically look at the odds of Russia kicking off a nuclear conflict, naturally the DoD has to plan for and assess any potential threats to CONUS regardless of how unlikely they may be.

But who knows maybe the NPR will sway me otherwise.


----------



## Gunz (Mar 1, 2018)

Even low-yield tactical nukes are the boogeyman, because--like chemical weapons--any detonation raises the stakes of conflict and begs an ascending retaliation. Use them at your peril. And thus we arrive once again at the brink of stalemate.


----------



## Kraut783 (Mar 1, 2018)

In the spirit of the cold war returning....I volunteer to take one for the team and be the target of any honey pot operations.


----------



## AWP (Mar 1, 2018)

SaintKP said:


> In terms of Russia putting us on watch I believe it has more to do with China experiencing a surge in nationalism and militaristic interest unseen since Mao, Russia is looking to piggy back this new attitude and find someone to buddy up with so they can have support when it comes to confronting the US (i.e. trying to put us on watch). We're going to be seeing this attitude not only from China but from Russia for the foreseeable future, as previously stated Xi Jingping basically becoming president for life, and Putin moving to do the same with his latest act of essentially barring Alexei Navalny from even running.



I like your post, but disagree with this paragraph. Russia and China have a past littered with conflict/ "microaggressions", so I can't see them buryinig the hatchet for the sake of offsetting the US.

PK/ India is about the only chance this world has for a nuclear exchange and neither side will do that except in the event of a mortal danger/ our country's being overrun scenario.

Cyber is the future and we're lagging far behind, at least 5 years IMO.


----------



## BloodStripe (Mar 1, 2018)

I'm going slightly off topic with this but since i started it by saying we should invest in cyber, what's the best way to recruit the best cyber minds to serve in the Government? As a contractor under a ridiculously high contract? Letting them serve in  the military without having the same PT standard or rank? What drives people to work for Google or any other tech company? Money? The cool factor?

Just throwing money at a problem doesn't always solve it. There are some DoD organizations that are trying to tap into the private sector cool factor with how they approach the acquisition process (DIUx), but they are such a unique organization that won't work force wide.


----------



## Dame (Mar 1, 2018)

AWP said:


> I like your post, but disagree with this paragraph. Russia and China have a past littered with conflict/ "microaggressions", so I can't see them buryinig the hatchet for the sake of offsetting the US.
> 
> PK/ India is about the only chance this world has for a nuclear exchange and neither side will do that except in the event of a mortal danger/ our country's being overrun scenario.
> 
> Cyber is the future and we're lagging far behind, at least 5 years IMO.


Agree with the idea that Russia and China do not trust each other and would rather go it alone. However, as far as what is really important (i.e. cyber) I could see the Russians piggy backing on the Chinese and their wholesale exploitation of cyber intel.



NavyBuyer said:


> I'm going slightly off topic with this but since i started it by saying we should invest in cyber, what's the best way to recruit the best cyber minds to serve in the Government? As a contractor under a ridiculously high contract? Letting them serve in  the molest without having the same PT standard or rank? What drives people to work for Google or any other tech company? Money? The cool factor?
> 
> Just throwing money at a problem doesn't always solve it. There are some DoD organizations that are trying to tap into the private sector cool factor with how they approach the acquisition process (DIUx), but they are such a unique organization that won't work force wide.



NSA and others have been recruiting warm bodies for a while but two issues (other than the cool factor). 1. Clearance. 2. Location. They need people who can clear and are willing to live in NoVA or MD.


----------



## NFB19 (Mar 1, 2018)

NavyBuyer said:


> I'm going slightly off topic with this but since i started it by saying we should invest in cyber, what's the best way to recruit the best cyber minds to serve in the Government? As a contractor under a ridiculously high contract? Letting them serve in  the molest without having the same PT standard or rank? What drives people to work for Google or any other tech company? Money? The cool factor?
> 
> Just throwing money at a problem doesn't always solve it. There are some DoD organizations that are trying to tap into the private sector cool factor with how they approach the acquisition process (DIUx), but they are such a unique organization that won't work force wide.


To my understanding, the DoD simply cannot match the private sector in salary and freedom of work. Why would talented, college educated individuals with a highly sought after talent pass up a starting six figure salary working 9 to 5 for O1 pay and a more demanding/stressful work environment in the DoD? 
Regardless, the Navy (I can only speak to the Navy) cyber community isn't expanding fast enough. At the Academy everyone is required to take two semesters of cyber. They push for more and more Computer Science, Information Technology, and Cyber Security majors. They've began building a multi-million dollar academic building specifically for the Cyber department (no other single department has its own building). This is all well and good, but when they only allow 1% of every graduating class to enter Cyber Command, it shows there's a difference between what the DoD wants to do/is doing and what they are actually doing.


----------



## BloodStripe (Mar 1, 2018)

NFB19 said:


> To my understanding, the DoD simply cannot match the private sector in salary and freedom of work. Why would talented, college educated individuals with a highly sought after talent pass up a starting six figure salary working 9 to 5 for O1 pay and a more demanding/stressful work environment in the DoD?
> Regardless, the Navy (I can only speak to the Navy) cyber community isn't expanding fast enough. At the Academy everyone is required to take two semesters of cyber. They push for more and more Computer Science, Information Technology, and Cyber Security majors. They've began building a multi-million dollar academic building specifically for the Cyber department (no other single department has its own building). This is all well and good, but when they only allow 1% of every graduating class to enter Cyber Command, it shows there's a difference between what the DoD wants to do/is doing and what they are actually doing.



The DOD has many great work/life programs that easily rival that of any company. NAVSEA has a lot of civilians who 100% telework, on top of their flex schedules, regular days off (four day work weeks), four hours sick leave accured every pay period, and up to eight (8) hours leave accrured every pay period.


----------



## Ooh-Rah (Mar 1, 2018)

NavyBuyer said:


> Letting them serve in the molest without having the same PT standard or rank?


I’ve been preaching for years that there are likely gay and transgender Americans who genuinely want to serve their country but have zero interest in doing anything combat related.

For that matter, there are likely “straight” Americans who would like to serve their country but have zero interest in anything to do with combat arms. 

I see absolutely nothing wrong with recruiting Americans who meet specific skill sets, and letting them serve in that capacity.  Maybe structure to the GS role.  

Hell, we pay crazy retention bonus’s for grunts, why not pay the same kind of money to folks who might not be able to pass a PFT, but sure as fuck drive the Chinese crazy and ensure that no one is hacking our satellites and fucking out our GPS.


----------



## AWP (Mar 2, 2018)

We have a couple of threads on recruiting people for cyber.


----------



## SaintKP (Mar 2, 2018)

@Dienekes Sorry for getting back so late, I read the NPR. While very informative and interesting, I still believe that a nuclear conflict is _extremely _unlikely. Regardless of how much a potential deterrent they may be, I don't see how with our current stockpile why that shouldn't be enough? Russia has to realize that even though they can increase their nuclear armament that it almost immediately has diminishing returns. That, if a nuclear conflict kicked off, it would almost assuredly end with world wide disaster. Not to mention the monumental environmental impact something like that would have for the survivors. 

@AWP You're right while Russia and China have traditionally not been best of friends, is it that far out to believe they would put aside their differences to disrupt the current pecking order? Even in the NPR it goes into detail about how communications between the US and China/Russia have deteriorated markedly and shows no signs of immediately improving. Yet, Putin and Jingping seem to be mirroring each other's movements. Now whether they're using one another for their own gain is up in the air. But for the mean time it's working. 

I remember reading a NYT article going into detail about the various resources stolen from the NSA and while they have been disastrous none of it was allegedly developed after 2013. So there remains hope that our most current cyber warfare tools were left untouched it remains to be seen the long term effect this will have on us.

Since I'm just a civilian with an interest in this area, I'd be extremely interested in hearing what you think we should do going forward and how ti recover from this. I can't remember what post it was that you made but it was about some coworker of yours trying to bring a unauthorized USB drive into a secure building, maybe we need to look over basic PERSEC/OPSEC practices again?


----------



## Gunz (Mar 2, 2018)

SaintKP said:


> ...I still believe that a nuclear conflict is [I]extremely [/I]unlikely.




I'd use "extremely unlikely" for Pakistan and India having a nuclear exchange, unless, as @AWP wrote, in desperation.

As far as the US/Russia/PRC, we glared at each other across the table threatening annihilation for almost half a century, and yet, behind the closed doors of power in Washington, Moscow and Beijing, it was the one great fear that kept all the parties from edging too close to the abyss. That fear drove policy. It factored into dealings in the Middle East, in Korea, in Vietnam, in Cuba.._.any point of friction_.

The Cold War, in my view, still stands as the litmus test of nuclear confrontation, and to the behavior of antagonistic states in a world filled with nuclear weapons.


----------



## AWP (Mar 2, 2018)

@SaintKP I'll respond in the morning (Middle Eastern time), I don't want you to think I'm blowing you off.


----------



## SaintKP (Mar 2, 2018)

Fair point @Ocoka I think I view nuclear conflict with a grain of salt because I never grew up during the cold war and so I was never privy to how very real a possibility it could be with school drills, neighbors building bunkers, and as you said every single foreign policy being shaped by the potential for conflict. It will be really interesting to see how we handle a second Cold War compared to the first one. 

@AWP you're fine man, no hurry it's the day off here and I'm looking to grill and become inebriated. Stay safe.


----------



## AWP (Mar 2, 2018)

SaintKP said:


> Since I'm just a civilian with an interest in this area, I'd be extremely interested in hearing what you think we should do going forward and how ti recover from this. I can't remember what post it was that you made but it was about some coworker of yours trying to bring a unauthorized USB drive into a secure building, maybe we need to look over basic PERSEC/OPSEC practices again?



First, consider there are essentially 3 domains in the cyber realm. Offensive, defensive, and administrative. I think our offensive capability is probably the weakest, "newest" to us, and hardest to develop. Defensive stuff is refined every day, almost to the point where Sys Admins can't effectively manage their networks (that's part of a larger discussion).. Administrative is kind of a subset of the defensive side, but I consider it it be your policies, procedures, and paperwork...and there's a lot of paperwork to track.*

The biggest threat to any network, civilian or military, is from your users. Intential or unintentional, a threat is a threat. I'm mostly the admin guy with a small role in the defensive side, things like patching machines, reviwing logs, vulnerability remediation, etc. So, given that your threats are mostly internal your local cybersecurity guy is the first line of defense, BUT without leadership to back them up they are mostly toothless admin bitches.

Short of patdowns or some type of draconian or electronic measures, guys are going to bring in stuff they shouldn't and do things they shouldn't. You can only train someone so much before they tune you out and the paperwork is mostly leadership's CYA tool with a side dish of HR leverage for the chronically stupid. Ultimately, you can nip some problems in the bud, but you have to do that via paperwork and I've seen too many places give guys a pass or two, and usually they only take a hit if an outside entity knows about the violation; that forces leadership to act. If you set a soft example, don't be surprised if you have an incident on your hands. 

* These aren't CISSP definitions, but I'm not looking up those in my books. Sue me.


----------



## SaintKP (Mar 2, 2018)

AWP said:


> First, consider there are essentially 3 domains in the cyber realm. Offensive, defensive, and administrative. I think our offensive capability is probably the weakest, "newest" to us, and hardest to develop. Defensive stuff is refined every day, almost to the point where Sys Admins can't effectively manage their networks (that's part of a larger discussion).. Administrative is kind of a subset of the defensive side, but I consider it it be your policies, procedures, and paperwork...and there's a lot of paperwork to track.*
> 
> The biggest threat to any network, civilian or military, is from your users. Intential or unintentional, a threat is a threat. I'm mostly the admin guy with a small role in the defensive side, things like patching machines, reviwing logs, vulnerability remediation, etc. So, given that your threats are mostly internal your local cybersecurity guy is the first line of defense, BUT without leadership to back them up they are mostly toothless admin bitches.
> 
> ...




Thanks for the explanation. Obviously the information leaks we've suffered in recent memory have been from a mix of people doing things they shouldn't and foreign entities gaining entry. But how do we stop this from happening aside from a complete and total lockdown and constant surveillance of employees? Like you said a person will eventually tune out safety brief #87 for the month, obviously you need a strong leadership to instill the right culture and mentality for things like this to stop happening.

Maybe the leadership in terms of managers (or whatever the equivalent is in the alphabet letter agencies), need to be looked at and evaluated instead of regular joe?


----------



## AWP (Mar 3, 2018)

SaintKP said:


> Thanks for the explanation. Obviously the information leaks we've suffered in recent memory have been from a mix of people doing things they shouldn't and foreign entities gaining entry. But how do we stop this from happening aside from a complete and total lockdown and constant surveillance of employees?



You don't. You can mitigate the risk, but never eliminate it, that becomes "residual risk." (I remembered something from my cert. Yay me!) You compartmentalize, move employees around, security scans, audits, training, oversight... you'd have to run any facility processing classified information (as you can imagine, this is a ridiculously large number) like a Vegas casino...now think of that manpower drain. Even then, you still have risk because people are people. They are weak, they are exploitable, they are angry, they are in debt, they are scumbags, etc.

The best thing IMO is regular thrid party audits with consequences for security violations...of course, good luck firing a gov't employee. "You left your safe open while you went on vacation and haven't inventoried the contents since 2016? Here's your tenth write-up, don't do it again."


----------



## Etype (Mar 4, 2018)

I wonder if the Russians have faith in their nuclear arsenal these days. A lot of the declassified Cold War era reports showed that the Soviets had little to no faith in their nuclear weaponry, and were under the impression that the US would annihilate them in the case of war.


----------



## Gunz (Mar 4, 2018)

Etype said:


> I wonder if the Russians have faith in their nuclear arsenal these days. A lot of the declassified Cold War era reports showed that the Soviets had little to no faith in their nuclear weaponry, and were under the impression that the US would annihilate them in the case of war.



That's very true. (And it's good to see you posting again.)


----------



## Gunz (Mar 4, 2018)

NavyBuyer said:


> This morning Putin delivered the Russia equivalent to the State of the Union Address. During part of it he essentially put the US back on notice that they are nuclear armed and we need to listen to them. They are also building up their stockpile of nuclear weapons as we are shrinking ours. Will this shift the tide in our nuclear program to grow, especially since our current POTUS is already threatening NK?
> 
> I personally would like to see an increase in our cyber programs. We know countries like Russia and NK are expanding in that arena and with everything requiring some type of connectivity, you can't nuke your way out of everything.




Going back to the OP and Putin's recent remarks, I think Trump welcomed a new nuclear arms race in a tweet about a year ago. The gist of it was that he planned to increase and upgrade our nuclear arsenal and dared any other country to keep pace with us.

One of the main reasons the Cold War thawed was the tremendous cost of nuclear competition on the US and USSR. It was an enormously expensive, decades-long drain on both economies, especially on the USSR.


----------



## BloodStripe (Mar 4, 2018)

Good points on the cost aspect. Given our 17 years of GWOT, and current $20.8 trillion debt, sooner or later we are gong to be in deep shit on that.


----------



## Marauder06 (Mar 4, 2018)

NFB19 said:


> To my understanding, the DoD simply cannot match the private sector in salary and freedom of work. Why would talented, college educated individuals with a highly sought after talent pass up a starting six figure salary working 9 to 5 for O1 pay and a more demanding/stressful work environment in the DoD?
> Regardless, the Navy (I can only speak to the Navy) cyber community isn't expanding fast enough. At the Academy everyone is required to take two semesters of cyber. They push for more and more Computer Science, Information Technology, and Cyber Security majors. They've began building a multi-million dollar academic building specifically for the Cyber department (no other single department has its own building). This is all well and good, but when they only allow 1% of every graduating class to enter Cyber Command, it shows there's a difference between what the DoD wants to do/is doing and what they are actually doing.




Why?  Because of the prestige associated with being an officer in the US military.  It's HUGELY attractive to people outside of the military.  We see it all the time with other professionals like doctors and lawyers.  The military is the most respected institution in America.  There are a lot of people who want to be a part of that.

I think letting people adopt the trappings of our profession without assuming the dignity, standards, and ethos of our profession will have a long-term, damaging effect.  We have plenty of people in the military as DoD civilians.  Hire them into the DoD, pay them a whole bunch of money, and tap into their expertise when and as we need them.  Don't let them dress up in a costume and play "officer."  If someone wants that, they can leave their blue hair and hash at the door and jock up like the rest of us.


----------



## SpongeBob*24 (Mar 4, 2018)

This thread has me thinking of The Americans...


----------



## DC (Mar 5, 2018)

Does this mean I have to return my Cold War service certificate?


----------



## BloodStripe (Mar 7, 2018)

Pentagon Says Russia Is Building Nuclear Torpedo Described as “Doomsday” Weapon

How does one stop a giant tsunami, especially when considered with rising sea levels this would in theory enable the waves to travel further inland, thus reaching more defense systems and homes?


----------



## DC (Mar 7, 2018)

Big surf is good🏄🏾‍♂️🏄🏾‍♂️🏄🏾‍♂️🏄🏾‍♂️🏄🏾‍♂️🏄🏾‍♂️🌊


----------



## BloodStripe (Mar 7, 2018)

But Charlie, er, Ivan, don't surf.


----------



## DC (Mar 7, 2018)

NavyBuyer said:


> But Charlie, er, Ivan, don't surf.


But they wish they did😉🤙🏿


----------



## Dame (Mar 10, 2018)

SaintKP said:


> Thanks for the explanation. Obviously the information leaks we've suffered in recent memory have been from a mix of people doing things they shouldn't and foreign entities gaining entry. But how do we stop this from happening aside from a complete and total lockdown and constant surveillance of employees? Like you said a person will eventually tune out safety brief #87 for the month, obviously you need a strong leadership to instill the right culture and mentality for things like this to stop happening.
> 
> Maybe the leadership in terms of managers (or whatever the equivalent is in the alphabet letter agencies), need to be looked at and evaluated instead of regular joe?



The Russians use a method called, "Never forget who fucked you yesterday." 



> SALISBURY, England (Reuters) - British police have identified more than 200 witnesses and are looking at more than 240 pieces of evidence in their investigation into a nerve agent attack on a Russian ex-spy and his daughter, interior minister Amber Rudd said on Saturday.



UK police identify over 200 witnesses in nerve agent attack: minister


----------



## BloodStripe (Mar 10, 2018)

Interesting video, slightly dated, but shows the sheer amount of nuclear dets since 1945 through early 2000's.


----------



## Chopstick (Mar 10, 2018)




----------



## Kraut783 (Mar 11, 2018)

Once KGB, always KGB.


----------



## Dienekes (Mar 14, 2018)

NavyBuyer said:


> Interesting video, slightly dated, but shows the sheer amount of nuclear dets since 1945 through early 2000's.



I interned at a place responsible for about 900 of those blue dots. The people there like to joke that the nuclear radiation from their atmospheric testing gave John Wayne cancer as it supposedly made its way to Utah. Fuckers


----------



## BloodStripe (Mar 14, 2018)

Dienekes said:


> I interned at a place responsible for about 900 of those blue dots. The people there like to joke that the nuclear radiation from their atmospheric testing gave John Wayne cancer as it supposedly made its way to Utah. Fuckers



There's a decent read out there called Full Body Burden that is about a girl who grew up around Rocky Flats. There were several large leaks there that ultimately lead to its closure.

Full Body Burden: Growing Up in the Nuclear Shadow of Rocky Flats by Kristen Iversen


----------



## Chopstick (Mar 17, 2018)

Hmmm.  "Compression to the neck".  I wonder what would cause that? 

Russian businessman's death being treated as a homicide



> British police say they are treating the death of London-based Russian businessman Nikolai Glushkov as a homicide, after a post-mortem revealed he died from compression to the neck. Glushkov was an associate of Boris Berezovsky, a Russian oligarch and Kremlin critic who died under disputed circumstances in 2013.
> Glushkov, 68, was found dead on Monday at his south London home where police say he had been living for two years.
> The death came a week after former Russian spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia were left critically ill from a nerve agent poisoning in the city of Salisbury.
> Police say "at this stage, there is nothing to suggest any link to the attempted murders in Salisbury," nor any evidence that Glushkov was poisoned.
> They say counterterrorism detectives are leading the case "because of the associations Mr. Glushkov is believed to have had."


----------



## Poccington (Mar 17, 2018)

Chopstick said:


> Hmmm.  "Compression to the neck".  I wonder what would cause that?
> 
> Russian businessman's death being treated as a homicide



The Ruskies ain't messing around!


----------



## AWP (Mar 17, 2018)

Chopstick said:


> Hmmm.  "Compression to the neck".  I wonder what would cause that?



Ask this guy.


----------



## Cookie_ (Sep 6, 2018)

Seems like the appropriate thread to post this. U.K. claims to have determined that two active GRU officers were responsible for the attempted assassination of Sergey Skirpal.

U.K. Charges 2 Men in Novichok Poisoning, Saying They’re Russian Agents


----------



## Gunz (Sep 6, 2018)

Cookie_101st said:


> Seems like the appropriate thread to post this. U.K. claims to have determined that two active GRU officers were responsible for the attempted assassination of Sergey Skirpal.
> 
> U.K. Charges 2 Men in Novichok Poisoning, Saying They’re Russian Agents




That's certainly in keeping with the M.O.; exotic weaponized toxicity. I have no doubt Putin has, in his lifetime, personally shot people in the back of the head. Or in the face. These are his critics, some he served with, traitors in his mind. He'll reach out and touch them. It sends a powerful message to those contemplating treachery.


----------

