For Russia, the Cold War had never simply disappeared they has continued to invest heavily in strategic and tactical nuclear weapons

Russian tactical nuclear weapons reflects how the Cold War never ended, they has continued to invest heavily in strategic and tactical nuclear weapons and they preparing to take over against any opposition across the globe.

Since 1992, the USSR has collapsed. The nuclear weapons held by the former Soviet Republics have been moved to Russia. Communism as official ideology has been abandoned in most of these places (except Belarus). Many of the post-WWII alliances have been abandoned by Moscow.

Several skirmishes have continued to occur on Russia’s borders, instigated by NATO. The conflict in South Ossetia and more recently in the Crimea are examples of this.

Also, the so-called “color revolutions” like the Orange revolution in Ukraine seem to have been instigated by the NATO or the CIA. Operation Gladio as well.

Many Russians still resent the West for imposing Economic Shock Therapy in the 1990s, which led to massive wealth extraction from Russia’s formerly nationalised industries. This led to the creation of several Oligarchs who either came to leadership positions or were jailed, or fled to countries like the UK.

Vladimir Putin, former Director of the KGB/FSB, has held power in Russia since 1999, alternating between being Prime Minister and President. His foreign policy stance towards Europe and NATO has been complicated. While not outright hostile, it does seem that tensions are high, and nuclear threat has not really lessened on either side.

Another thing to note is that the “War on Terror” is not just a US phenomenon. It is going on in Russia too, and is used to justify the same kind of repressive policies. In places like Dagestan and Chechnya, it can be seen as a proxy war between NATO and Russia.

So, is the Cold War still going on? Perhaps the best thing to say is that it has shifted significantly, but not ended.

Russia under Vladimir Putin is more repressive and more aggressive than the Soviet Union under Mikhail Gorbachev was. It has invaded Ukraine and menaces the Baltic republics. In 2013, Russia spent a higher portion of GDP on defense than the United States for the first time in a decade. As Europe contends with economic depression and internal terrorist violence, Russian money flows to extremist parties in the hope of breaking apart the European Union. One former Warsaw Pact member, Hungary, is backsliding toward authoritarianism. “Europe whole and free” sounds like haunting mockery.

As the relationship between Russia and the West has deteriorated, some have hastened to blame the United States and nato for starting a new Cold War, while others entirely blame Putin himself. There is, however, another way to think, both more plausible and more troubling: the question is not “Has a new Cold War started?” but rather “Did the old Cold War ever end?”

The Russian military, in plans drawn up at the request of President Vladmir Putin, argues that the only way Russia can deal with an escalating regional conflict with the U.S., would be to employ nuclear weapons. Though Russia’s military has been considerably downzied since the end of the Cold War, and its conventional forces hold little weight against a modern, equipped army, Russia has continued to invest heavily in strategic and tactical nuclear weapons.

Sometime during the 90s, Russia attained nuclear superiority over the U.S. While Russia’s large, strategic nuclear weapons have remained in parity with the U.S., Russia’s tactical nuclear arsenal has been estimated to include between 20,000 to 40,000 weapons. At the same time Russia has continued its nuclear buildup, the U.S. has virtually destroyed its arsenal of tactical nuclear warheads. Under orders from the Bush administration, the U.S. has also been moving to further reduce the U.S. strategic arsenal. Currently, the nation’s most modern fleet of ICBM, the MX missiles, are being destroyed.

Russia has reportedly started making steps towards destroying missile systems across the globe. Reports say that the country is now looking into gliders that will not be beaten by others. Is the speculated World War 3 news about to happen?

Reports say Russia is preparing to take over against any opposition across the globe. They are now in possession of Yu-74 ultra-maneuverable hypersonic glide vehicles that would be unveiled soon to ramp up Russia’s reputation in military artillery.

According to Global Research, Russia has been developing hypersonic weapons in the past few years. These weapons would have a speed between 3,840 mph (Mach 5), and 7,680 mph (Mach 10). The system uses sophisticated technologies for maneuvering against a wide range of missile defense systems, and allows precise and rapid delivery of warheads.

Reports also say that the gliders are developed to be loaded onto Russia’s RS-28 Sarmat, the state of the art heavy liquid propelled ICBM which is currently being developed for the Russian Army. NATO has given the RS-28 its codename “Satan”; it has been in development since 2009 and is alleged to render all current missile defense systems obsolete.

The Russian military are about to test the first prototypes of the S-500 Prometey air and missile defense system, also known as 55R6M Triumfator M – capable of destroying ICBMs, hypersonic cruise missiles and planes at over Mach 5 speeds; and capable of detecting and simultaneously attacking up to ten ballistic missile warheads at a range of 1300 km. This means the S-500 can smash ballistic missiles before their warheads re-enter the atmosphere.

So in the case of RAND-style NATO pussyfooting, the S-500 would totally eliminate all NATO air power over the Baltic States – while the advanced Kornet missile would destroy all NATO armored vehicles. And that’s not even considering conventional weapon hell.

If push comes to nuclear shove, the S-400 and especially the S-500 anti-missile missiles would block all incoming US ICBMs, cruise missiles and stealth aircraft. Offensive drones would be blocked by drone defenses. The S-500 practically consigns to the dustbin stealth warplanes such as the F-22, F-35 and the B-2.

The bottom line is that Russia – in terms of hypersonic missile development – is about four generations ahead of the US, if we measure it by the development of the S-300, S-400 and S-500 systems. As a working hypothesis, we could describe the next system – already in the drawing boards – as the S-600. It would take the US military at least ten years to develop and roll out a new weapons system, which in military terms represents a generation. Every Pentagon planner worth his pension plan should know that.

Russian – and Chinese – missiles are already able to knock out the satellite guidance systems for US nuclear tipped ICBMs and cruise missiles. They could also knock out the early alert warnings that the satellite constellations would give. A Russian hypersonic ICBM flight time, launched for instance from a Russian nuclear sub all the way to the US East Coast, counts for less than 20 minutes. So an early warning system is absolutely critical. Don’t count on the worthless THAAD and Patriot to do their job. Once again, Russian hypersonic technology has already rendered the entire missile defense system in both the US and Europe totally obsolete.

So why is Moscow so worried by the Pentagon placing the Aegis system so close to Russia’s borders? A credible answer is that Moscow is always concerned that the US industrial military-complex might develop some really effective anti-missile missiles even though they are now about four generations behind.

At the same time, Pentagon planners have reasons to be very worried by what they know, or hint. At the same time the Russian military – in a very Asian way – never reveal their full hand. The key fact of the matter needs to be stressed over and over again; the S-500 is impenetrable – and allows Russia for the first time in history to launch a first strike nuclear attack, if it ever chooses to do so, and be immune to retaliation.

The rest is idle babbling. Still, expect the official Pentagon/NATO narrative to remain the same. After all, the industrial-military complex is a cash-devouring hydra, and a powerful enemy is a must (the phony Daesh “caliphate” does not count).

The Threat Narrative rules that Russia has to meekly accept being surrounded by NATO. Russia is not allowed any response; in any case, any response will be branded as “Russian aggression”. If Russia defends itself, this will be “exposed”as an unacceptable provocation. And may even furnish the pretext for a pre-emptive attack by NATO against Russia.