Anybody else following this?

I will allow you to do your own research, but to summarize:

      4 Russian Naval vessels including nuclear capable, will be docking in Havana next week (the week of June 10th, 2024).

       Russia has announced they are reviewing their nuclear weapons protocols.

       Russia mentioned supply nukes to other countries to help them from the west.

I'm reading up on the first CMC, and it seems Russia never intended to use them in aggression, but as a bargaining chip to get US nukes removed from Turkey. I strongly believe this a strategic move to lessen the proliferation of US nukes, and/or reduce the likelihood of US strikes.

Unfortunately, Putin is his own person, so we don't know his intentions. I have to believe he learned lessons from the 1st CMC.

Regardless of intentions, the slightest mistake on either side could result in catastrophe.

Anyone else considering a fall out shelter?

It was bound to happen again after we stopped trying to have relations with Cuba ... just saying ... secondly ... there are several nuclear-armed Russian subs sitting outside of our coasts all the time ... sooooooo

Whole lot of nothing. I am not in the least bit concerned. If they were truly a threat they would be sitting at the bottom of the ocean in short order.

Funniest part though…..

“The Russian “frigate Gorshkov, the nuclear-powered submarine Kazan, the fleet oil tanker Pashin, and the rescue tug Nikolai Chiker” will visit the port of Havana between June 12 and 17, according to the Cuban Revolutionary Armed Forces in a statement published by the Foreign Ministry.”

They can’t refuel anywhere so they are bringing their own oil tanker for fuel and a tug boat for when their high quality ships break down. We might not have to sink them….they might sink on their own!!

They literally don’t have enough firepower to do anything meaningful. A single American MEU carries far more firepower and meaningful capability.

I’m happy for the sailors though. They get to leave their trailer park of a country for a little while and enjoy a port call.

Fire One

Third world saber rattling.

Russia can certainly cause WWIII with their shenanigans, but the world in no way resembles 1962.



ETA
Keep in mind, this is the same  Russian Navy that hasn't demonstrated the ability to dominate the Black Sea.

Putin projecting traditional Russian nation state naval power to the Caribbean is a fantasy.

Is nuclear proliferation by the Old Superpowers really a thing anymore?

I’m more concerned about nukes controlled by radical Muslims.

I checked a fallout map and I'm actually in a pretty good spot. Though the country as a whole would be fucked.

The last time they put nukes in Cuba it was a result of us putting nukes in Turkey (but nobody like to talk about that)

This time the Russians are putting nukes in Cuba because the USA by Nato proxy is threatening/planning to invade Russia.

It's never the people who deserve to die that die in wars.

Let’s add some perspective…this from 2019….


https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/navy-ships/a28197756/russian-navy-warship-visiting-havana/

A Russian Navy task force has docked at Havana, Cuba on a goodwill stay that sends a pointed message to the United States. The guided missile frigate Admiral Gorshkov, accompanied by an entourage of support ships, pulled into Havana earlier this week. The voyage is meant to project Russian strength, but that quickly fades when the circumstances of the frigate visit are examined closely.

The Admiral Gorshkov pulled into Havana on Monday, the latest stop on a ‘round-the-world tour that kicked off on February 26 in St. Petersburg, Russia. According to U.S. Naval Institute News, Gorshkov is the lead ship in a four-ship formation that includes the multifunctional logistics vessel Elbrus, the medium sea tanker Kama, and the rescue tug Nikolai Chiker.

The Russian task force has already visited Djibouti, Sri Lanka, and China, and made a stop in Ecuador before passing through the Panama Canal to the Caribbean. This is the first significant voyage for Admiral Gorshkov, which entered Russian Navy service in 2018.

Admiral Gorshkov is 426 feet long and displaces approximately 4,500 tons. The frigate is armed with one 130-millimeter A-192M Armat naval gun, eight SS-NX-26 Yakhont anti-ship missiles, and the Hurricane surface-to-air missile system. According to reports, the ship is also equipped with BrahMos anti-ship missiles.

Developed by India and Russia and named after the Brahmaputra and Moscow rivers, BrahMos is a ramjet-powered anti-ship missile with a 600-pound high explosive warhead. BrahMos is perhaps the fastest anti-ship missile in existence, capable of zipping over the wave tops at Mach 3 (2,300 miles an hour.)

The Russian government uses fleet visits such as these to show support for its allies—or former allies—abroad. The Russian carrier Admiral Kuznetsov, for example, has made two voyages to Syria. While the prospect of a Russian warship visiting Havana—only 227 miles from downtown Miami—seems unusual, it really isn’t. U.S. warships regularly sail near Russian territory, particularly in the Black Sea, and this is just Russia returning the favor.

That said, Russian trips across the Atlantic are relatively rare; the last took place in 2013, when the guided missile cruiser Moskva and her entourage docked in Cuba. Russia would undoubtedly prefer to make the trip more often, but most of Russia’s surface fleet averages at least 30 years old.

Under closer scrutiny, the trip hardly looks threatening. Gorshkov may be a new ship, but it’s a poster child for everything wrong with the Russian military. Construction began in 2006 and was only completed in 2018, meaning it took 12 years to complete. Frigate-sized ships typically take only two to three years to complete. Here’s the ship during the 2018 commissioning ceremony.

Like much of the Russian military, Gorshkov experienced repeated setbacks with funding and technical problems. The fact that Gorshkov is a new ship but traveling with a rescue tug says Russia is not confident in the ship’s mechanical reliability, nor in the willingness of local authorities to allow a broken-down Russian warship to dock locally.

Finally, although just 4,500 tons—less than half that of a modern U.S. destroyer—Gorshkov is the largest surface ship built in Russia in nearly 20 years. The U.S. Navy has received nearly three dozen ships during the same time period; Arleigh Burke- and Zumwalt-class destroyers, for example, are two to three times larger than Gorshkov by displacement.

According to USNI News, the U.S. Navy is keeping tabs on the Russian task force. The guided missile destroyer USS Jason Dunham is shadowing the four Russian ships from a distance. U.S. Northern Command, also known as NORTHCOM, told USNI News, “We are aware of the deployment of the Russian ship Gorshkov and are taking steps to actively track it. We won’t discuss all measures being taken, but NORAD is conducting air operations in defense of the U.S. and Canada and USNORTHCOM has deployed maritime assets to track Gorshkov.”

Literally not one news organization is talking about putting Russian nuclear missles or bombs in Cuba today unlike in 1962.

Here’s some history

A nuclear powered submarine is not a nuclear weapon. The Russian sub in this case, the Kasen is a Yasen class sub. It’s not a boomer (nuclear ICBMs). It is reportedly capable of carrying nuclear cruise missles which do not have nearly the range of a ICBM type of missle. Given how well publicized this trip is, I have no doubt an American attack sub is shadowing it. And, the Russians will never know where it is. The sub in this case had construction begin July 2009 but then took almost 8 years to be launched and another 4 years before it was commissioned in the Russian fleet…so approximately 12 years. For comparison, a US Virginia class sub takes approximately 3 years from start of construction to being commissioned.

The US also has a recent history of a nuclear sub visit to Cuba…Guantanamo Bay specifically 2023……

https://abcnews.go.com/amp/International/cuban-government-calls-us-nuclear-submarine-stop-provocative/story?id=101184988

And, the US sub visit was also no big deal but Cuba tried to make a big deal out of it…which is funny

Food for thought.  Up to you to decide what you think about the information below.  


https://lansinginstitute.org/2022/11/09/russias-nuclear-arsenal-seems-grossly-exaggerated/

Russia’s nuclear arsenal seems grossly exaggerated
November 9, 2022

There are well-grounded doubts as to whether Russia has got a combat-ready nuclear arsenal. There’s a good chance it makes the Kremlin speculate on nuclear blackmail, with threats to launch nuclear strikes on NATO and its allies.

With NATO’s Steadfast Noon nuclear deterrent exercise over, as they started on October 17, Moscow announced plans to conduct its Thunder exercise.

And while this exercise usually takes place following NATO exercises, much more attention is focused on it this time.

The 1963 treaty bans nuclear tests in the atmosphere, space and under water, and the Soviet Union, and then Russia, have observed the terms. The latest nuclear tests took place with the Soviet collapse approaching in 1990. Eight warheads, with a total yield of 70 kilotons, were exploded underground at the Novaya Zemlya test site, “Object-700”.

Russia occasionally announces verifying the readiness of intercontinental ballistic missiles, as their service life has long exceeded all laid standards, in some cases.

With up to 46 missiles available, R-36M2 Satan can deliver more than 30% of all Russian nuclear warheads. Their production ended with the Soviet collapse, and their maximum life ended in 2005, though it was “extended” then, saying the missiles were allegedly fit for use up to 2020.

The oldest missile was shot off to test the real readiness, and if it fulfilled its mission, the operating life continued. If not, another one was launched and so on, until the task was completed.

But these missiles are relatively new if to compare to the UR-100N (RS-18), with up to 20-24 missiles still in silos, as the latter of which was produced before 1985.

The readiness of Topol ballistic missile also raises questions. It was put into service in the 80s, then upgraded to Topol-M in mid-90s. 18 Soviet Topols are still in service, and 78 Russian Topol-Ms were produced before 2011. The rest of the ground-based nuclear triad is based on 170 SS-27 (Yars), an updated version of the Soviet Topol, put into service in 2009.

Of all ground-based systems, 88 missiles were produced more than 30 years ago, 78 missiles – nearly 20 years ago, making up almost 50% of the entire arsenal, with similar question on submarine-launched ballistic missiles.

But the most doubtful is condition of Russian nuclear munition. That is why the Kremlin is eager to make underground nuclear tests. This munition has its own storage life, much shorter than conventional weapon. With the storage period expired, the charge capacity is rapidly falling.

The munition requires maintenance, such as replacing consumables, neutron fuses, for example. These fuses consist of elements that lose their radioactivity with time. Chemical and physical properties of other nuclear weapon components also change.

Things are complicated by highly corrupted 12th Main Directorate of Russian Defense Ministry, and multiple process failures while constructing warhead storages, including Gadzhiyevo (Russian Northern Fleet and nuclear submarines base), Olenegorsk, and Severomorsk. Funds for nuclear arsenal maintenance were stolen.  

The hypothesis about most Russian nuclear arsenal unfit for action might be confirmed by the fact that nuclear tests scheduled for October 7 and 12 this year, initiated by Russian President Vladimir Putin, were canceled. Data that require additional evidence suggest there were 5 more attempts to test nuclear weapons from October 14-20. There were just two tests, with negative result, though. There was an attempt of underground nuclear test in the Irkutsk region on October 14, with no expected outcome.

Underground tests scheduled for October 17-18 were canceled for “technical issues”. Underwater tests in the Barents Sea on October 20 were canceled as well.

Secret new nuclear weapon tests (presumably a product of the Poseidon project) scheduled for October 20 in the Gulf of Finland turned out to be a fiction.

It turns out that Russia’s speculating on dirty bomb today is the only reliable and successful way. The poor state of Russian nuclear arsenal has obviously triggered threats to use those weapons in Ukrainian theater of war. Just 41% of Russia’s nuclear arsenal is theoretically ready to be used immediately. 1,500 nuclear warheads, out of 6,000, have far exceeded normal service life and are subject to disposal. Russia had 336 intercontinental ballistic missiles with nuclear warheads at the end of 2021, most of which had served their standard life.

Guaranteed 20-years of safe operation for Topol, UR-100N UTTKh and R-36M2 Satan were over in 2021-2022. The long-term plans by Russian military suggested those missiles had to be gradually phased out, with not more than 5% of them remaining in service by 2020. The missiles’ life had been extended by a factory in Ukraine, which stopped that work after 2014.

Of 12 nuclear storages, 5 are located directly either near Moscow or at Russian border (the village of Mozhaisk in the Moscow Region and Belgorod). The remaining 7 storages are located not far from the Urals, or in the Far East.

It is unclear whether Russia has still got nuclear bombs for tactical aircraft and atomic shells for 152 mm and 203 mm artillery. That special munition was probably transferred for storage in early 2000s, when the emphasis was on mobile delivery systems, and depleted its resource then. Soviet and then Russian leaders committed themselves to destroy all nuclear artillery, nuclear warheads of tactical missiles, nuclear anti-personnel mines, and to remove tactical nukes from ships, multi-purpose submarines and naval aviation. These nukes and nuclear warheads of SAMs were to be placed in a central storage, with some of them destroyed.

NATO headquarters claims that by 2010, Russia had concentrated its tactical nuclear weapons at “central storage facilities” in Russia; removed tactical nukes from its ground forces; reduced tactical nuclear arsenal by 75% cutting non-strategic nuclear weapons. Russian storages today, however, contain 1,500-2,000 nukes.

Possibility for Russia to use nuclear weapons in the near future is grossly exaggerated, it seems.

To complicate matters further, there is a question how to protect Moscow in case of a responsive nuclear strike.

The missile defense system of Moscow consists of 68 silos for launching 53T6 A-135 Amur system missiles that was put on combat duty back in the 1970s. Those 53T6 “anti-missiles” had completely depleted their resource in early 2010s, with control testing in Kazakhstan needed to keep them on alert.

The A-235 Nudol system was designed to update Moscow missile defense system, with testing in fall of 2021. But Russia is unable to mass-produce this system and guarantee its effectiveness.

The task to extend the life of launchers was given to Russian JSC Makeyev Design Bureau, the main designer of submarine launched ballistic missiles that has not got enough experience or qualified experts, which puts their combat capability into question.

The role of Strategic Missile Forces in Russia’s overall nuclear capacity has decreased from 70% to nearly 35% already in 2020-2021.

It would be enough to strike four critical targets: Gadzhiyevo in the Murmansk region, Vilyuchinsk in Kamchatka, an airfield near the city of Engelsk in the Saratov region, and a bomber base in the Amur region, to neutralize 80% ofRussian nuclear capacity. The remaining mobile systems (Topol and Yars) are believed to be a target for high-precision weapons. Meanwhile, probability of any damage to the United States and its allies during the preemptive strike by Russia is almost zero, as it is said.

Russia has lacked practical experience in handling nuclear weapons from 1991. This adds to the possibility of human error, mishandling while delivering, loading, or firing.

The tactical nuclear strike algorithm consists of several steps:

1. The order received.

2. The 12th Main Directorate of Defense Ministry sends a convoy to the central nuclear weapons storage, gets warheads there, and then takes them to delivery systems.

It would be quite difficult for Russia, therefore, to covertly prepare for a tactical nuclear strike, as the state of munition raises doubts whether it is safe and effective for Russia itself to use it.

This situation makes Russia lose its only card in global confrontation and blackmail.

You okay? Name calling  really isn't your style.

Just saw something this morning that they are going to be giving Iran icbms and nuke powered subs... so it looks like the Russia, Iran, China thread might prove to be accurate afterall.

If I was a country, I don’t think I would accept a nuke sub (or any other for that matter) from Russia. They like to sink and not come back up……


https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_lost_Russian_or_Soviet_submarines

Here is a list of Iranian sub capabilities as of 2023.

https://www.nti.org/analysis/articles/iran-submarine-capabilities/

The Islamic Republic of Iran Navy (IRIN) commands a submarine force of 19-27 vessels. The IRIN plays a crucial strategic role in Iran’s national security architecture due to the country’s dependence on the Persian Gulf for trade and security. Besides the Persian Gulf, Iran’s naval forces also operate in the Caspian Sea, the Gulf of Oman, the Arabian Sea, and the Indian Ocean.

Total Submarines in Fleet: 19-27

Ballistic Missile Submarines (SSBNs): 0
Nuclear-Powered attack submarines (SSNs): 0
Diesel-electric attack submarines (SSKs): 4
Mini Submarines (SSMs): 15-23
Air-independent propulsion (AIP) enabled: 0

For analysis of Iranian/Russian military cooperation:

https://iranprimer.usip.org/blog/2023/may/18/iran-russia-burgeoning-military-ties

Various clips from the long article and lots more details at the link.

In the late 1980s and early 1990s, Iran became dependent on Russia for advanced weapons that it could not produce at home and could no longer acquire from the West. By 1991, Russian arms transfers to Iran, including bombers, tanks and submarines, hit an unprecedented $772 million.

The Iranians were often not satisfied with the quality of Russian arms and warplanes–or servicing of the equipment, Farzin Nadimi of The Washington Institute for Near East Policy told The Iran Primer. Russia provided training and parts for repairs. But most technical documents “were never delivered together with the hardware, and Iranians had to compile them from scratch,” he said.

Russian equipment also required “more frequent repairs and overhauls compared to Western examples,” and Iranians were “never happy with the long lead time associated with periodic repairs and overhauls in Russia,” Nadimi added. These issues forced Iran to conduct “major repairs and overhauls in-house for their Russian-made arms and components.” Initially, Iran sent plane engines and three submarines back to Russia for repairs according to original agreements. But by 2012, Iran was able to repair the submarines, procured in the 1990s, without Russian assistance.

Iran instead prioritized self-reliance and developed its domestic arms production capabilities, particularly missiles and drones, amid its international isolation. Tehran advanced to the point where it sought to export weaponry.

By 2023, Iran had exported more than a thousand drones to Russia in addition to artillery and tank ammunition for the war in Ukraine.

When the US military plans any operation, part of planning considerations is the enemy’s centers of gravity (strengths) and critical vulnerabilities (weaknesses). Then, as part of the planning process we exploit their weaknesses and try to avoid their strengths. But, that requires an honest assessment of both.

Any planning we do, we should always try to do an honest assessment of the threats we might face. When it comes to threats, using the military concept of Operational Risk Management, we can assess the threats and then plan mitigation/survival plans based on our assessment of the threats.

High consequences/high probability
High consequences/low probability
Low consequences/high probability
Low consequences/low probability

In order to do a valid threat assessment/risk mitigation, we must consider the above steps and need accurate information to help us make informed decisions. Pretending threats aren’t real is a bad course of action but also believing something to be a high  consequence/high probability threat when it is not will also cause us to prepare needlessly wasting time and money.  Educating ourselves will help us assign threats appropriately instead of running around panicking about everything.

Unfortunately survivalists/preppers are really bad about believing every doomsday scenario and often refuse to look at real facts when making plans. We end up wasting time and money needlessly. That said, it’s your time and money so waste away if you wish. I prefer not to waste time and money as much as possible so I try to take an informed look at local, regional, national, and international events as much as possible instead of blindly believing every doomsday scenario that comes down the internet.

Technology has changed a lot since 1960's.  Doesn't matter today.  Let them have their fun!

IMO the problem is that what is a fact is not always discernable, especially w/ the current administration.  There is a lot of burying of facts to fit narratives (e.g., trans shooter's manifesto not being released).  Take, for example, the attempted incursions into military bases.  One was widely reported on and another not so much.  Then Admiral Caudle goes on TV and states that this is happening 2-3 times per week.  So is this type of thing a one off event or is it occurring regularly.  Hell, had a local news channel not reported on this, we probably wouldn't know much about it.

Being a prepper means erring on the side of caution.  So, while I agree that a lot of time and money gets wasted, some times you just have to take an educated guess or go w/ your gut feeling.

The Russian navy is getting their ass kicked by a country that doesn’t even have a navy. They would be at the bottom of the sea before lunchtime if the FA.

While government officials certainly do try to spin things a certain way at times/often, we also live in a time of unprecedented access to data and news. There are many news sources out there reporting on stuff. Go read those as well to help formulate your own opinions. Some of the non-national news sites will have very good coverage to their local events. Twitter/X has a lot of good info (and plenty of garbage too).

I agree with erring on the side of caution but informed decisions will keep you from going with your gut feelings. Gut feelings are often good when it involves interpersonal relationships but generally not very good when looking at long range planning or international events (in my opinion). People are unpredictable. Large organizations and countries are usually somewhat predictable and the more info you have on them, the more predictable they are.

There have been many many survivalist/prepper “disasters” in my lifetime that have proven to be nonsense. Remember the black helicopters paranoia? Russian/Soviet “suitcase nukes” already on American soil? There are many more I’ve seen in my lifetime….those are just the ones I remember at the moment.

If you (“you” generically to whoever is reading this) believe we will see nuclear war soon, you probably should be putting every penny you have into building a doomsday bunker and filling it with supplies. If you believe it but aren’t building or outfitting your bunker, then you really aren’t serious about your beliefs.

I remember a family friend when I was a kid. Mid to late 1980s. They moved to our area and actually built a bunker. They believed in one of the doomsday “prophets” who was preaching his nonsense. I remember as a kid listening to the “prophet” talk and was thinking “this guy seems like a nut” but I also didn’t have the knowledge that I have now. They bought into his doomsday garbage and went all out. Their bunker was impressive. I have to admire their dedication to their beliefs though. That same family has since sold that house and live elsewhere in the country….ironically in a much more likely nuke exchange target area.

I thought the Russian boomer strategy after Walker exposed the SOSUS system was to keep them in their own coastal waters. Like the Sea of Okhotsk, where their own attack subs can defend them.

TJ,

I agree with most of what you said. However, a nuke and a radiation leak from a plant are way different. We had seen this with 2 cities in Japan. Fat Boy and Little Man were way dirtier then current large nukes. Yet, those cities were safe to occupy shortly after. The areas around Chernobyl and Fukushima have isotopes with a long half-life.

As for the bomb drills.....I can recall the teachers never telling us what they were for. The fact that we did them in the Hudson Valley where no targets were located was laughable.

You need to study history, both current and past events, because much of what you believe is flat out wrong.

I do agree with you that we need a President in the White House not a resident. I also generally agree on your views of the outcome of nuclear war…..no one really wins even if you win. But, at the same time, there have been more than 2000 nuclear bombs detonated in this world and we are all still here. Tsutomu Yamaguchi was in both Hiroshima and Nagasaki when we dropped nuclear bombs on both cities and survived both. He lived till he was 93.

Putin makes vague nuclear comments occasionally but the one who really talks the most about Russia nuking other countries is Dmitry Medvedev. That guy is an idiot and is widely known in Russia as an idiot. Nothing he says should be taken seriously….I mean nothing he says is taken seriously by Russian people so not sure why we should….

As I said before, if you really believe this, you would be building a bunker and/or outfitting it and getting ready. If you aren’t, then you really aren’t serious about the threat you believe we are facing.

And, for some inexplicable reason, there would be no bread, milk, or eggs (Disaster French Toast(TM)) anywhere in the country within a half an hour. And, of course, no toilet paper either.

this. Russia is laughable NK now.

And….they are gone.

No nukes…no nuclear war….a whole lotta….nothing.

Headed to Venezuela now. Gonna visit their buddies in Venezuela.

Unfortunately, my expectation is the vast majority of Americans would be oblivious initially. Then as more "friends" posted about it on their FacePlant/Twatter/Instathot pages they would turn from "grazing" to "stampede". Complete and utter chaos.

As for not knowing jack about nuclear protection, outside the .mil, I'd say that's a pretty safe bet. Ever since the fall of the Soviet Union, there's been this notion that the threat of nuclear attack ended with the Cold War. Turns out, not so much. Whatever protection one might want to have would have to be on your own because for sure there's no Civil Defense like there used to be and most of the old fallout shelters don't exist anymore (and neither do the old buildings they used to be in). The closest thing your average urban/city dweller could do would be to find a bank vault in the middle of a big bank building and hope you can get in it with two weeks worth of supplies (which will look really odd to bank personnel) before the bank closes. Folks with basements in the city might fare a little better, folks in the country with storm shelters/cellars might fare a little better, wealthier folks that had Atlas Survival Shelters plant something on their land might do OK. Again, assuming you have sufficient supplies to stay down there for a couple of weeks. (And, assuming you can get to whatever shelter is available.)

My parents lived thru Cuban Missile Crisis V1.0. They both pretty much knew they were toast if the rooskies decided to let loose. My dad worked for GD (now LockMart) in Ft. Worth and the family lived not far from there initially. Eventually we moved out to a farm about 40 miles to the south. It had a storm cellar but it was not well sealed and would have been useless in case of attack (or tornado either for that matter). Wife and I have been house/homestead shopping and we're seriously considering having an ICF "basement" added to whatever house we get. That would serve as both a tornado shelter and fallout shelter.

Why not do a full ICF house to include the roof?  That way when something hits in the middle of the night, you are more protected.

Man, you're old if you remember that one! (Says the other guy that remembers that one.)

We looked at doing that but we're hoping to get out of where we're at sooner rather than later. The one outfit we talked with was saying it might be as long as a year to get it completed due to supply chain and labor issues (including subcontractors being booked up) and permit lag times. We were looking at an 8" core thickness wall house and a 12" core thickness wall "basement". We were told that it might make more sense to have a semi-detached garage with the "basement" underneath that rather than under the house part. Supposedly would be a faster/easier build.

Our thinking was that we'd get a warning far enough in advance for a tornado we'd have time to head to the shelter. We're hoping to be far enough away from a large city/target that we would have time to get to the shelter to avoid the fallout since we'd be far enough away to not be in the direct effects of the blast zone.

Fail Safe.

Honestly the more I think about it, the more concerned I get.  Russian nuclear forces are not as large as they used to be, but that Frigate in Cuba almost certainly has their latest generation hypersonic missiles... which are unstoppable... and which probably have nuclear warheads.  

Russian Frigate sails to the Atlantic with Hypersonic Missiles (2023)



If you estimate range at 600 miles, from Havana all of Florida is in range.   It is a dangerous first strike capability.

I'm not convinced the land based Russian ballistic missiles are super dangerous as anti-missile defenses exist for them, but sub based missiles and hypersonic ship based missiles can cause havoc in the coastal areas with little response time.

https://thebulletin.org/2024/03/hypersonic-weapons-are-mediocre-its-time-to-stop-wasting-money-on-them/amp/


Further, Ukraine using US Patriots has shot down at least one, and likely two, Zircon missiles.

Why would the Russian ship shoot nuclear Zircon missiles at the US? Let’s say they do…..then what? Every Russian surface  ship in the Atlantic become converted to Russian subs and the Russian subs all go down and stay down. If that’s their first strike plan, they are dumber than whale shit. Russians are stupid but they aren’t remotely THAT stupid.

To sit in fear over this non important event is pointless. By the way, the scary ships and sub are not in Cuba any more.

Facts not emotion should concern us and should drive our planning.

Some on our political side believe America should pull out of the world and not be the world “policeman”. Whether we should or not….well I’ll stay out of that discussion.

You are a wise man TJ.  Far wiser than the crowd we have in Washington.  

If anyone wants to take the deep dive to get smart on nuclear conflict, Julian Spencer-Churchill made his Strategic Studies lectures available online for free:

Nuclear Strategy Lectures

The reality is not precisely as portrayed in the media.  It's all really interesting to me, but I'm an aerospace guy.

Ukraine has make lots of unsubstantiated and baseless claims (ie Ghost of Kiev, longest sniper kill ever, etc).  Why Russia's Hypersonic Missiles Can't Be Seen on Radar:



While satellite systems may be able to provide some early warning of hypersonic missile attacks based on thermal signature, making an intercept would be very difficult.  

The fact that the ships are still in the Gulf and could return to Cuba whenever the Russians feel like it is not very re-assuring to me.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/04/02/russia-war-hypersonic-ukraine-zircon-strikes-naval-missile/


Russians love claiming new super weapons. In real life, they have seldom, if ever, performed like they have boasted. Remember the MIG 25? It terrified the West until we learned its real capabilities.

https://www.historynet.com/mig-25/

The notion that hypersonic speed by itself creates invisibility is just nonsense. If that were true, we wouldn't be able to track ICBMs or reentry vehicles at all. We can and do with radar. We have the ability to intercept hypersonic missiles both on land and at sea. It's just another tool in the toolbox and not some media-fueled boogeyman.

The reason that the Russian navy often visits Cuba is so they can go someplace warm where the sun shines, same as the reason why American tourists visit the Caribbean.