Russian State TV Anchor: Russia Could Turn US To "Radioactive Ash"

An anonymous reader writes with a Ukraine news roundup. "'Russia is the only country in the world realistically capable of turning the United States into radioactive ash,' anchor Dmitry Kiselyov said on his weekly news show on state-controlled Rossiya 1 television. ... His programme was broadcast as the first exit polls were being published showing an overwhelming majority of Crimeans voting to leave Ukraine and join Russia. He stood in his studio in front of a gigantic image of a mushroom cloud produced after a nuclear attack, with the words 'into radioactive ash.' ... Kiselyov has earned a reputation as one of Russia's most provocative television news hosts, in particularly with his often blatantly homophobic remarks. But he is also hugely influential with his weekly news show broadcast at Sunday evening prime time. Putin last year appointed Kiselyov head of the new Russia Today news agency that is to replace the soon to be liquidated RIA Novosti news agency with the aim of better promoting Russia's official position. — Russia has threatened to stop nuclear disarmament treaty inspections and cooperation. Russian troops are reported to have seized a natural gas terminal in Ukraine outside of Crimea. There are reported to be 60,000 Russian troops massing on Russia's border with Ukraine."

Comments

And the US could turn Russia into vapor

[ackthpt]

I see the Putin Propaganda Machine is in full-Stalin mode.

Re:And the US could turn Russia into vapor

[Anonymous Coward]

Certainly I'd be more worried about their intentions to sink the US dollar by selling all their reserves held in that currency. A lot cheaper than firing several ICMBs, and much more effective...Regarding the economic warfront, I don't see any tactical advantages for the US here. Imagine the Russians selling all their US dollars, China following them, and bringing the value of a dollar bill cheaper than paper toilet...

Re:And the US could turn Russia into vapor

[Opportunist]

Well, considering that conventional warfare is a nono, and nuclear warfare is a BIG NONO, but economic warfare is fair game, I'd say you have a point.

Re:And the US could turn Russia into vapor

[mikael]

But once you have done that once, that's it, the economic weapon has been used, and you've got nothing left. Of course, there's always the threat of using it, or selling off a few million dollars of shares every now and again just to prove the point.

Re:And the US could turn Russia into vapor

[Chrisq]

this is not possible,i am from east . if they do this , their own economy will fall

It would certainly hurt both countries. But arguably Russia could survive in "economic lockdown" easier than the West, it would be like going back to just before glasnost. For the West it would be something unprecedented.

Re:And the US could turn Russia into vapor

[Ottawakismet]

Dont be stupid. Russia holds a mere $200b in treasury bills. Selling them would destabilize Russia more than the US. The US would buy that amount up in a few months. You have to understand the scale of debt - trillions in US debt exist, and 200$b is more like a little wave in a lake. China is opposed to Russia about the intervention, but they will not act on their opposition. The American economy is much larger than the Russian, and many other central banks hold way more US debt then the US.

Re:And the US could turn Russia into vapor

[Anonymous Coward]

>wouldn't have the balls

Most of us would say "isn't insane," rather than "doesn't have the balls." Do you self-identify as a violent wacko?

Re:And the US could turn Russia into vapor

[Rob Riggs]

It's very easy for the U.S. to pay off the U.S. debt. It is denominated in U.S. dollars.

Re:And the US could turn Russia into vapor

[gtall]

Really? As of last year, Russia held $225 billion in U.S. dollars. So, you think Russia will tank a $17 Trillion dollar economy with $225 billion. I find it helpful to have a sense of perspective when dealing with numbers.

Re:And the US could turn Russia into vapor

[borcharc]

This risk is outdated. With the amount of bond buying that the US Federal Reserve has engaged in over the past few years buying all of the debt held by Russia and China combined would not even make a dent should they desire to sell it all, the FED and other nations (Japan) will happily buy. Russia's $100 billion and even China's $1.2T are small potatoes compared to the $16T+ the fed and friends have printed with little consequence as of yet.

Russia relies on Europe energy sales for 25% of its GDP, Europe relies on Russia to provide 6% of its energy. Sanctions targeting this will hurt Russia very badly and they know it. They have been strong arming Europe for years on energy, delaying their economic recovery. Its time the tables were turned.

Re:And the US could turn Russia into vapor

[GodfatherofSoul]

It doesn't help that certain segments of Congress keep talking up Putin like he's the second coming of Alexander the Great. Russia is a broke EX world power. Pushing around pissant satellite states and a spigot on a pipeline are about the extend of their power. We need to treat them that way and stop giving them far more credit than they deserve. All we're doing is emboldening Putin.

The dude goes around shirtless. That should be clue enough he's an attention whore and we all know what happens when you give an attention whore more attention.

Re:And the US could turn Russia into vapor

[MightyMartian]

Have you thought about the costs to Russia? Such a mass sell off would indeed slaughter the price of the dollar, and thus would cut the value of Russia's greenback reserves enormously. Sure the US and the rest of the global economy would be in agony, but Russia would have cut off its own nose despite its face.

Russia is not some infinitely powerful state. By and large, it's a petro-state, and any move that causes precipitous global economic decline will do it significant damage in the process.

Re:And the US could turn Russia into vapor

[MightyMartian]

How would Russia survive it better when it relies upon energy exports to keep its economic ship afloat? Guess what the first victim of a major economic slowdown is...

Re:And the US could turn Russia into vapor

[MightyMartian]

The West didn't intervene in the Prague Spring, and they won't likely directly intervene now. Ukraine isn't worth the pain of open warfare.

Beyond that, the US has been for weeks now trying to push for vast overarching sanctions. It's the EU that lacks the backbone. For full sanctions to really work, it has to be both the US and the EU.

Re:And the US could turn Russia into vapor

[geekoid]

"I'm fairly sure that Obama wouldn't have the balls to push the Red Button regardless of Putin wanting to,
or common sense.

It takes bigger balls to find actual solutions.

I like how people have suddenly for got that turning either country into a 'radioactive waste land' will throw the whole world back to the stone age. Possible even eliminating humans from the planet.

" China (and maybe India, too) would be "
eating popcorn? no. More like panicking to figure out how to survive the massive radioactive cloud.

Re:And the US could turn Russia into vapor

[Anonymous Coward]

"to spite its face"

Re:And the US could turn Russia into vapor

[Opportunist]

Problem is, once the USD goes into free fall, that dream is over. Being able to money print your money out of debt only works as long as those owing you accept that money as payment.

Also, you might want to take a look at SDRs and how they're used for currency value determination.

Re:And the US could turn Russia into vapor

[Eunuchswear]

Bragging about the arsenal size is just idiotic.

Yup.

The US probably has 2000 odd warheads ready to go. Are there 2000 interesting targets in Russia?

Fuck, even France has 290. Destroy the top 290 targets and what is left?

Target 290 by size: Vidnoye,Moscow Oblast, population 52,198.

Re:And the US could turn Russia into vapor

[Kvasio]

China has a choice here, as they could switch to Euro.
Russia won't switch to Euro, so what would they buy instead? Gold? they are gold supplier. Would make no sense. Yen? They did not end WW2 yet.

And TV idiot forgot, that in global nuclear conflict there are no winners. With the possible exception for rats, cockroaches and tardigrades.

Re:And the US could turn Russia into vapor

[Hodr]

I'm not sure I understand all of this talk of "dumping", or maybe it's the people proposing the action that don't understand it. They can only do 3 things with those bonds, cash them in, sell them to someone else for a loss (dumping?), or burn them.

The first option does nothing, as claiming matured bonds is what you are supposed to do. The third option is awesome, free money.

The second option, if they had enough to kill the world market (which I don't think they do) for US bonds might have an impact, but only if they price very low and somehow managed to keep the US itself from buying them.

The fact of the matter is, as soon as they post 100B in US T-Bills for substantially lower than the market rate someone will buy them all instantly and they will no longer exert pressure on the market for new debt.

If they doled them out slowly, there isn't enough to cause an issue.

Re:And the US could turn Russia into vapor

[Xest]

China wont join Russia because if it sells it's US dollars then it just means it's tanked the main country in the world it's dependent on for exports meaning it'll kill it's own economy.

Russia doesn't have enough dollars to matter.

Economically, Russia finds itself on the losing side of history once again here if it tries to push it's luck.

Re:And the US could turn Russia into vapor

[lgw]

With the amount of bond buying that the US Federal Reserve has engaged in over the past few years buying all of the debt held by Russia and China combined would not even make a dent should they desire to sell it all, the FED and other nations (Japan) will happily buy.

At this point I imagine the Fed chair cackling like the Emperor in Star Wars "witness the firepower of this fully operational buying-station!" OK, the new one isn't quite old enough to look like the Emperor yet, but give her time.
 

Re:And the US could turn Russia into vapor

[Hategrin]

Really? Some madman fires nukes at you because he thinks you think you have a bigger dick than he does. The only way you could have stopped them was to gurantee that you would retaliate, but you decided being a pushover was morally superior, so that didn't happen. The missiles are in the air. How do you stop them?

Re:And the US could turn Russia into vapor

[s.petry]

And US propaganda is different how exactly? Because you think the US Government is on the same team as you perhaps?

Issues like this are not singular, but if you are going to call out Russian propaganda then call it out on both sides. US propaganda is portraying Russia in Crimea like the US invasion of Iraq, but it's not even close. I keep waiting for US media to start falsely claiming that Russians are out murdering everyone in the Ukraine and that actually started happening today when reporters were telling stories about people disappearing.

First, look at Crimea from a military strategy point. Russia has had military and naval bases there for decades. If the Philippines had a revolt you are telling me the US would sit and do nothing to protect their military bases there? Come now, you and I both know we would and should. We have those bases for the same reason Russia has bases in Crimea. In fact the US has over 800 bases (depending on the source over 1,000) and is exerting pressure on not just Russia but China. You would be well suited to read that whole article by the way, since it backs most of my statements.

The US denounces military expansion by other countries, but we continue to expand ourselves. This is in addition of course to drone strikes in dozens of countries, the Iraq war, the Afghanistan war, and funding and providing weapons for the majority of colored revolutions which caused lots of death and destruction.

Next, Crimea was about to be an independent autonomous country free of the Ukraine in May. They tend to side with Russia since Russia has lots of military there, and until Nikita Khrushchev gave the land to the Ukraine was part of Russia. This part gets magically lost by any US media discussing Crimea. I work with many people from Russia, Georgia, and the Ukraine. They tend to laugh at how bad US propaganda is, and how it portrays very little truth. Eastern Ukraine is pro Russian, and Western Ukraine not so much. What you hear in the US is the Western spin, and what you hear in Russia is Eastern spin. Somewhere in the middle is the population of the Ukraine and Crimea, who want both sides to leave them alone and let them decide their own future.

Let me be very clear, I'm not backing Russia nor do I think Russia is necessarily correct. At the same time, I'm not backing the methods the US has been using for imperialism either.

Didn't we see the most growth in Democracy during times of peace where the US was the example for other countries to follow? We were founded with expressly that concept in mind, we are not supposed to invade or go to war. We are supposed to defend ourselves and be an example for other countries to follow.

We are failing in that regard today, and the increases in turmoil all over the world is in great part due to US meddling and instigating conflicts. Imperialism has changed, where instead of the US taking over a whole territory US and US Friendly businesses take over instead. No need for troops when you control the economy, but making millions off people poor causes lots of resentment.

Re: And the US could turn Russia into vapor

[EvilSS]

Prevailing theory on first strike is that you fire everything you can, targeting not only cities and military installations, but also the nuclear fields of the enemy to try to knock out as much of their ability to strike back as you can. The reason for this is that you assume you will not get a second chance, as the opposing country will answer in kind. You would fire all of your land-based missiles, along with a portion of your sub-launch weapons to get an early first strike on extremely high-value targets. That still leaves you with airborne bombers and, most importantly, the remainder of your SLBMs for 2nd strike. Russian nuclear ballistic subs carry 16-20 SLBMs with 8 warheads each. That's plenty of reserve power.

Ignoring all that: Have you looked at a map recently? The US is big. To have the effect you are talking about a strike that would require hundreds of warheads. That would be more than enough according to Sagan et al.

Re:And the US could turn Russia into vapor

[Kojiro Ganryu Sasaki]

Just pointing out to anyone taking the above poster seriously that he's quoting a nazi site. Friatider.se.

Re:And the US could turn Russia into vapor

[Culture20]

Some madman fires nukes at you because he thinks you think you have a bigger dick than he does.

And suddenly Anthony Weiner is the hero. "Mr. Weiner, please explain how we can send photos of our penises to this madman to reassure him!"

Re:And the US could turn Russia into vapor

[reve_etrange]

Printing money == instant inflation.

All the US money (bonds and dollars) we have were "printed." Every year that the Federal gov't runs a deficit, it prints that amount of new money. And yet, no inflation crises materializes.

At a huge cost for Americans.

Which Americans? Inflation may cost our wealthy creditors, but it will help the much, much larger part of us who have mortgages, student loans, car loans, credit card debt, business loans, etc. - especially considering that our economic growth is currently hampered by a persistent debt overhang caused by a deflationary credit crises.

Also, higher inflation will server to reduce the trade deficit by disincentivizing imports in favor of domestic alternatives, and by making our exports cheaper in foreign markets. Both of these effects will increase domestic production and employment.

Re:And the US could turn Russia into vapor

[rahvin112]

I always laugh when someone suggests dumping 162 billion in bonds could crush the US economy. That's literally like 3 days worth of auctions. As you said, they dump them all at once and someone pays 72 billion for them, and over a period of a month doubles their money. Now if they owned the 1.3 trillion that china does they could probably hurt the dollar for a month or two while turning their trillion dollars into a 100 billion. And in the process China would destroy their own export economy as the dollar fell and the trade deficit imploded as US imports stopped.

See that's the problem, they try to "crash" the market and they are guaranteed to lose massive amounts of money on the bonds. And in the long run the bonds recover and there is no long term issue. In the short term it may actually help the US economy by devaluing the dollar short term and harming imports.

So.....

[segedunum]

Kind of like a Russian Sarah Palin then?

Re:So.....

[Opportunist]

Relax. Russia is no problem. That's more for internal use than external use. I mean, ponder what it would be like if the US were in Russia's boots.

The country "lost" the cold war, depression sets in, crime lords get rich and take over economy and partly politics, the general population is doing worse and worse... I think it's not hard to see how a lot of people are yearning for the "good ol' times" where Russia was some big shot country.

Now ponder what it would be like if this was the US, and how a president could score with the lowbrow rednecks and of course the military with some speeches about greatness and how we can snuff out that big bad enemy of the days of yore.

Saber rattling with respect to what's going on on the Crimea peninsula, but little substance.

Re:So.....

[jedidiah]

> Tell me again why Obumbles gets more RSPECT than Palin?

Even Bush the Younger gets more respect than Palin.

Have we said the same thing?

[ranton]

I would be surprised if someone like Rush Limbaugh hasn't said something similar about Russia on their US based cable/radio news programs in the past few weeks. I'm sure both of our nations have their own crackpot news agencies.

Re:Have we said the same thing?

[Dan East]

The difference is that Limbaugh doesn't speak for a state-controlled news agency, and thus Limbaugh's opinions are only that of a single man with a microphone and do not represent the government of an entire country.

Re:Have we said the same thing?

[supersat]

In Capitalist America, news agencies control the state!

Re:Have we said the same thing?

[Rockoon]

Exactly.

When speaking with an Egyptian co-worker (a Christian who finally got the rest of his family out of Egypt only recently) he had remarked that the reason that most people in the world take what Americans say on television so seriously because in most of the world (Egypt for example) you cannot say things on television that the State doesnt agree with without getting into serious trouble, so they myopically assume that the same must also be true in America. If Timmy Talking Head says that he hates Muslims on American T.V, and the American government didnt arrest him immediately, then most of the world assumes that the official State position of America must be to hate Muslims.

Now here we have some myopic American assuming that the rest of the worlds media is just like American media. Its not.

Now as far as Putin, NPR recently had an interview with chess Grand Master Gary Kasparov who has for a long time been outspoken against Putin. He pointed out that the KGB had a file on Putin long before he became the glorious leader which included a personality profile. The KGB had determined that Putin had an unusually low sense of danger, the kind of guy that thinks he can get away with just about anything, and that might include launching a nuclear first strike against America.

Re:Have we said the same thing?

[X.25]

The difference is that Limbaugh doesn't speak for a state-controlled news agency, and thus Limbaugh's opinions are only that of a single man with a microphone and do not represent the government of an entire country.

Wait - you believe that something being said on state owned TV station is in the name of government and entire country?

What is wrong with you people?

You probably never lived in a country with 'state owned TV' if you can make statements this retarded. Sigh.

Allow Russians to vote with their feet

[bkmoore]

For as long as Putin and his cronies are in power, the U.S. and the rest of the western world should offer any law-abiding Russian citizen who wants to leave an automatic green card, work permit, etc. We cannot realistically or morally change Russia from the outside. The most powerful weapon against fanaticism would be allowing regular law-abiding Russians to vote with their feet. We could always use some more scientists and engineers anyway...

Re:Allow Russians to vote with their feet

[Erikderzweite]

The Crimeans have just voted with their feet. A pity that they took the whole peninsula with them :-)

Re:Allow Russians to vote with their feet

[Ottawakismet]

a fake vote where supposedly all the ukrainians and tatars also wanted to join Russia. Ya right. 97% approval is the kind of election result dictatorships produce, honest elections never get that result. Support for separation was 40%, so its a total lie that suddenly everyone wants separation.

Re:Allow Russians to vote with their feet

[Erikderzweite]

Keep in mind that the new Ukrainian government has announced massive austerity program. Pensions in Russia are about four times higher and the economy is much healthier compared to the Ukraine. Besides, massive economic support was promised by Russia.

Re:Allow Russians to vote with their feet

[dunkelfalke]

For both economic reasons - Ukraine is piss-poor compared to Russia, and for ethnic reasons - Ukrainians are a minority in Crimea.

Re:Allow Russians to vote with their feet

[Xest]

To be fair support for separation was higher (roughly 50%) but support for joining Russia was only 41% before Putin's thugs turned up armed and en-masse to rig the vote.

You're right though, the referendum was a joke, I don't even know why dictators like Putin do this, you'd think if you're going to rig a vote you at least make it semi-believable at like 60% or something, but really, 97%, are they actually trying to take the piss or what? 82% turnout and 97% vote for joining Russia does indeed imply that Ukrainians and Tatars that are almost universally opposed to joining Russia voted for exactly that. This alone shows what an absolute complete and utter farce it was.

As if the hijacking of all Crimean comms in and out, radio, TV, and surrounding of military bases and refusal to allow international observers in whilst beating up journalists wasn't obvious evidence enough that a fraudulent vote was about to follow. I'm not sure who exactly they're trying to convince short of the few useful idiots that are dotted about here and there, but what do they matter? It's almost like they're just trying to convince themselves they're doing the right thing, as it sure as hell ain't convincing anyone else that matters.

Re: What does this have to do with tech news?

[Anonymous Coward]

For the last time: Slashdot is not a technology news website. It is a news site for nerds. There is a difference.

Celebrity Death Match

[zerosomething]

In this corner Bill O'Reilly for the U.S of A and in the other corner Dmitry Kiselyov for the Russian Federation. In a match to see who can talk their own country into radioactive ash first!

READY, FIGHT!!!

Russia has been turning into a fascist state

[Maimun]

for many years. The writing has been on the wall all the time. Those idiotic threats are just the tip of the iceberg. It would be wrong to downplay them with the arguments like "some idiot lost his nerves". The bellicosity has been on the rise in Russia for many years and no, the reason is not that they were unjustly insulted by the West. The fascist-like regime wants to expand and dominate. It is that simple. The fascizoids can never be stopped by appeasement. The appeasement did not work before WWII and will not work now. The only argument they understand is raw power. For them, politeness and tolerance are signs of weakness and met with derision. Maybe, I hope, one day the Russian people will kick the fascists out of power but for the forseeable future this is wishful thinking.

Well, international relations are heating up again, coffee-break is over and the West should better wake up and start doing something. If raw power is the only thing that can stop the bad guys, raw power we must accumulate.

Re:Russia has been turning into a fascist state

[Kiuas]

The fascist-like regime wants to expand and dominate. It is that simple. The fascizoids can never be stopped by appeasement. The appeasement did not work before WWII and will not work now. The only argument they understand is raw power. For them, politeness and tolerance are signs of weakness and met with derision. Maybe, I hope, one day the Russian people will kick the fascists out of power but for the forseeable future this is wishful thinking.

Agreed. Putin is basically doing "blitzkrieg" on the world political stage and currently has the ball. He's constantly been referring to "the situation in Ukraine" and "the situation in Crimea" as being something that justifies the actions of "pro-russian militias" (note: the Kremlin denies that they have any direct control over the troops occupying Crimea, officially they're supposed to be militias regradles of the fact that they're using equipment thus far only seen in service with the Russian special forces). Putin's playing the victim card to the west, and the nationalistic chest-beating "for the motherland" -card to his own citizens - all the while giving a strong signal to people like me living next to his country (in my case Finland) that any Russian promises regarding the respect for international law and sovereignty are better used as toilet paper.

West should better wake up and start doing something.

Yes.

If raw power is the only thing that can stop the bad guys, raw power we must accumulate.

The west does not need to accumulate power. The west (that is the US/NATO) already controls the largest military force in the history of mankind. We have power, we need the will to use it. If we let this slip Russia will keep chiseling ex-USSR nations piece by piece using the same lame "we're just protecting out citizens" -excuse as the west re-enacts the 30s and tries to appease a man who clearly doesn't give a shit about talk. The west can "condemn" the actions as many times and as "harshly" as we want, but until a line is drawn and it is made clear to Russia that the crossing of this line will lead to military action, Putin will keep controlling the ball.

Re:Interfering West Again

[Xest]

Yes, because everything wrong on Earth is the West's fault, and Russia is a perfectly little angel that produces nothing other than rainbows and unicorns.

In other news Kim Jong Un was re-elected with 100% of the popular vote for being such a glorious leader of the people.

Well....

[Anonymous Coward]

He's not Stalin at all, he's Putin it into top gear!

Re:Well....

[Anonymous Coward]

He's not Stalin at all, he's Putin it into top gear!

And if you didn't like the pun, well Crimea river.

The US did, so why not Russia?

[rvw]

The US invaded Iraq without UN approval and with false proof (remember the WMD) to "liberate" it. Now Russia does the same with Crimea, only the proof is much more valid, even if this poll was a complete farce. What's new?

Disclaimer: I'm EU citizen and totally against all this idiotic behavior. But let's be honest - the US has no moral standing in cases like this anymore, even if Obama is not to blame for Iraq. And the EU, well, they simply have no backbone in foreign policy.

Re:The US did, so why not Russia?

[MightyMartian]

This obsession with "moral standing" is ludicrous. Do you think the British Empire had heap loads of moral standing on September 1, 1939? Do you think the US and the USSR had barrels of "moral standing" hanging around when they joined the fight against the Nazis?

Nations do shit things, sometimes for perceived benefit, or simply out of greed. If we allowed every ill actions we had done in the past hold us back, no one would ever intervene when some other nation state violated the general rules of international conduct?

Russia signed an agreement in the 1990s guaranteeing Ukraine's territorial integrity in exchange for Ukraine's nuclear stockpiles. Thus, even excluding any notions of territorial integrity that have been a part of international law since the end of WWII, Russia is in violation of its own treaty with Ukraine.

So yes, it sucks ass that the US invaded Iraq, but do you seriously want the US to sit in the corner and refuse to come out when Russia starts enlarging itself with trumped up referendums, because a decade ago it did a naughty thing?