- Comms
- Law
- Medic
- News
- Opinion
- Threat Watch
- Training
- Warrior Tools
- Accessories
- Ammo
- Body Armor
- Books
- Clothing
- Commo
- Gear
- Handguns
- Holsters
- Knives
- Long Guns
- ACC
- Accuracy International
- Barrett
- Benelli
- Beretta
- Blaser
- Bushmaster
- Custom
- CZ
- Desert Tactical Arms
- DPMS
- FN
- Forums
- HK
- IWI
- Kel-Tec Long Guns
- LaRue
- LWRC
- McMillan
- Mosin Nagant
- Mossberg
- Para
- Remington
- Rock River Arms
- Ruger Long Guns
- Sabre Defense
- Sako
- SIG Sauer
- SKS
- Smith & Wesson Long Guns
- Springfield
- Styer
- Weatherby
- Wilson Combat
- Winchester
- Magazines
- Maintenance
- Navigation
- Optics
- Sights
- Tech
- Warriors
Posts Tagged russia
Russian Hackers Attack Illinois Utility
Posted by Gary in Comms, News, Threat Watch on 19/Nov/2011 20:56
From: PopSci
The Illinois Statewide Terrorism and Intelligence Center released a “Public Water District Cyber Intrusion” report on November 10 that indicates that hackers may have had access to the system since September. Hackers using Russian IP addresses hacked the software vendor that makes the system. They were then able to access the vendor’s database of usernames and passwords, and used the stolen credentials for remote access to the SCADA system’s network. These vendors keep records of their customer’s access information for maintenance and upgrading the systems.
Two to three months before the discovery of the hack, operators noticed “glitches” in the remote access to the SCADA system. “They just figured it’s part of the normal instability of the system,” said Joe Weiss, cybersecurity expert and managing partner at Applied Control Solutions, who obtained a copy of the report. “But it wasn’t until the SCADA system actually turned on and off that they realized something was wrong.”
Visegrad: A New European Military Force
Visegrad: A New European Military Force is republished with permission of STRATFOR.
By George Friedman
With the Palestinians demonstrating and the International Monetary Fund in turmoil, it would seem odd to focus this week on something called the Visegrad Group. But this is not a frivolous choice. What the Visegrad Group decided to do last week will, I think, resonate for years, long after the alleged attempted rape by Dominique Strauss-Kahn is forgotten and long before the Israeli-Palestinian issue is resolved. The obscurity of the decision to most people outside the region should not be allowed to obscure its importance.
The region is Europe — more precisely, the states that had been dominated by the Soviet Union. The Visegrad Group, or V4, consists of four countries — Poland, Slovakia, the Czech Republic and Hungary — and is named after two 14th century meetings held in Visegrad Castle in present-day Hungary of leaders of the medieval kingdoms of Poland, Hungary and Bohemia. The group was reconstituted in 1991 in post-Cold War Europe as the Visegrad Three (at that time, Slovakia and the Czech Republic were one). The goal was to create a regional framework after the fall of Communism. This week the group took an interesting new turn.
India Working With Russia On 5th Generation Fighter
From DefenceWeb:
The T-50 is intended to replace the MiG-29 and Su-27 in Russian Air Force service and will also serve as the basis for the Sukhoi/Hindustan Aeronautics Limited (HAL) Fifth Generation Fighter Aircraft (FGFA) project being jointly developed with India.
The Moscow Attack and Airport Security
Posted by Brian in Opinion, Threat Watch on 28/Jan/2011 09:00
The Moscow Attack and Airport Security is republished with permission of STRATFOR.
By Scott Stewart
The Jan. 24 bombing at Moscow’s Domodedovo International Airport killed 35 people and injured more than 160. The attack occurred at approximately 4:40 p.m. as passengers from several arriving international flights were leaving the airport after clearing immigration and customs. The attacker (or attackers; reports are still conflicting over whether the attack was conducted by a man or a man and a woman together) entered the international arrivals hall of the airport, a part of the facility that is outside the secure area and that is commonly packed with crowds of relatives and taxi and limo drivers waiting to meet travelers.
Once the attacker was in the midst of the waiting crowd and exiting passengers, the improvised explosive device that he (or she) carried was detonated. It is not clear at this point whether the device was command-detonated by the attacker as a traditional suicide bomb or if the device was remotely detonated by another person. The attack was most likely staged by Islamist militants from Russia’s Northern Caucasus region who have conducted a long series of attacks in Russia, including the Aug. 24, 2004, suicide bombings that destroyed two Russian airliners.
The Domodedovo attack serves as a striking illustration of several trends we have been following for years now, including the difficulty of preventing attacks against soft targets, the resourcefulness of militants in identifying such targets and the fixation militants have on aviation-related targets. Read the rest of this entry »
Making Sense of the START Debate
Making Sense of the START Debate is republished with permission of STRATFOR.
By George Friedman
Last week, the U.S. Senate gave its advice and consent to the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START), which had been signed in April. The Russian legislature still has to provide final approval of the treaty, but it is likely to do so, and therefore a New START is set to go into force. That leaves two questions to discuss. First, what exactly have the two sides agreed to and, second, what does it mean? Let’s begin with the first.
The original START was signed July 31, 1991, and reductions were completed in 2001. The treaty put a cap on the number of nuclear warheads that could be deployed. In addition to limiting the number of land- and submarine-based intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) and strategic bombers, it capped the number of warheads that were available to launch at 6,000. The fact that this is a staggering number of nuclear weapons should give you some idea of the staggering number in existence prior to START. START I lapsed in 2009, and the new treaty is essentially designed to reinstate it.
It is important to remember that Ronald Reagan first proposed START. His initial proposal focused on reducing the number of ICBMs. Given that the Soviets did not have an effective intercontinental bomber force and the United States had a massive B-52 force and follow-on bombers in the works, the treaty he proposed would have decreased the Soviet quantitative advantage in missile-based systems without meaningfully reducing the U.S. advantage in bombers. The Soviets, of course, objected, and a more balanced treaty emerged.
What is striking is that START was signed just before the Soviet Union collapsed and implemented long after it was gone. It derived from the political realities that existed during the early 1980s. One of the things the signers of both the original START and the New START have ignored is that nuclear weapons by themselves are not the issue. The issue is the geopolitical relationship between the two powers. The number of weapons may affect budgetary considerations and theoretical targeting metrics, but the danger of nuclear war does not derive from the number of weapons but from the political relationship between nations. Read the rest of this entry »
WikiLeaks Reveals Hostilities Between Russia and Georgia
Posted by Brian in News, Threat Watch on 3/Dec/2010 16:09
Wired’s Danger Room reports that Russia may have been secretly trying to destabilize Georgia before the battle in 2008.
The brief shooting war between Russia and Georgia in 2008 was just the final, action-packed scene of a years-long drama. As the U.S. Embassy in the Georgian capitol of Tblisi saw it, Moscow spent much of the previous decade destabilizing the former Soviet republic, using “missile attacks and murder plots,†natural-gas “sabotage†and support to Georgian separatists.
NATO’s Lack of a Strategic Concept
Posted by Brian in News, Opinion, Threat Watch on 12/Oct/2010 16:14
NATO’s Lack of a Strategic Concept is republished with permission of STRATFOR.
By Marko Papic
Twenty-eight heads of state of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) will meet in Lisbon on Nov. 20 to approve a new “Strategic Concept,†the alliance’s mission statement for the next decade. This will be NATO’s third Strategic Concept since the Cold War ended. The last two came in 1991 — as the Soviet Union was collapsing — and 1999 — as NATO intervened in Yugoslavia, undertaking its first serious military engagement.
During the Cold War, the presence of 50 Soviet and Warsaw Pact armored divisions and nearly 2 million troops west of the Urals spoke far louder than mission statements. While Strategic Concepts were put out in 1949, 1952, 1957 and 1968, they merely served to reinforce NATO’s mission, namely, to keep the Soviets at bay. Today, the debate surrounding NATO’s Strategic Concept itself highlights the alliance’s existential crisis. Read the rest of this entry »
Military Inflation: Russia’s inventive way to deceive the enemy – inflatable weapons.
Posted by Jack Sinclair in News on 11/Oct/2010 19:22
The inflatables are stitched together at a former hot-air balloon factory
“The Russian military has come up with an inventive way to deceive the enemy and save money at the same time: inflatable weapons.
They look just like real ones: they are easy to transport and quick to deploy.
You name it, the Russian army is blowing it up: from pretend tanks to entire radar stations.
The decoys are a hundred times cheaper than the real thing, which means Moscow will save a lot of money by blowing up its own weapons.”
Video here:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-11511886
U.S. welcomes Russia’s ban on S-300 missile sales to Iran
Posted by Jack Sinclair in News on 22/Sep/2010 18:09
The U.S. welcomes the Russian president’s decree to prohibit the delivery of S-300 air defense missile systems and other weapons to Iran, a White House official said.
National Security Council spokesman Mike Hammer welcomed the move as a “faithful and robust implementation of UN Security Council resolution 1929” of June 9, 2010, which imposes an additional set of sanctions on the Islamic Republic over its controversial nuclear program.
Militancy and the U.S. Drawdown in Afghanistan
Militancy and the U.S. Drawdown in Afghanistan is republished with permission of STRATFOR.
By Scott Stewart
The drawdown of U.S. forces in Iraq has served to shift attention toward Afghanistan, where the United States has been increasing its troop strength in hopes of forming conditions conducive to a political settlement. This is similar to the way it used the 2007 surge in Iraq to help reach a negotiated settlement with the Sunni insurgents that eventually set the stage for withdrawal there. As we’ve discussed elsewhere, the Taliban at this point do not feel the pressure required for them to capitulate or negotiate and therefore continue to follow their strategy of surviving and waiting for the coalition forces to depart so that they can again make a move to assume control over Afghanistan.
Indeed, with the United States having set a deadline of July 2011 to begin the drawdown of combat forces in Afghanistan — and with many of its NATO allies withdrawing sooner — the Taliban can sense that the end is near. As they wait expectantly for the departure of the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) from Afghanistan, a look at the history of militancy in Afghanistan provides a bit of a preview of what could follow the U.S. withdrawal. Read the rest of this entry »
Iranian lawmaker Alaeddin Boroujerdi to Russia: OK, now give us the S-300 missile system
Posted by Jack Sinclair in News on 21/Aug/2010 22:57
BUSHEHR, Iran, Aug. 21 (Xinhua) — Iranian lawmaker Alaeddin Boroujerdi hailed Russia’s move on Bushehr nuclear plant fuelling and expressed hope Russia’s next step would be the delivery of S-300 missile system to Iran, the semi-official ISNA news agency reported on Saturday.
Iran struck a deal with Russia in 2007 to buy the S-300 systems, but Russia delayed the delivery of the anti-aircraft missiles.
“The U.S. also pressed its European allies to take the same measures (of sanctioning) against Iran. They also put Russia under pressure to prevent loading Bushehr nuclear plant,” Boroujerdi told ISNA.
Russia’s move ensured Iranians that it abides by its commitments and public opinion in Iran, he said, adding that ” Russia (should) implement its obligations on S-300 missile system as well.”
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/world/2010-08/22/c_13455886.htm
Power Struggle Among Russia’s Militants
Power Struggle Among Russia’s Militants is republished with permission of STRATFOR.
By Ben West and Lauren Goodrich
On Aug. 12, four members of the militant group the Caucasus Emirate (CE) appeared in a video posted on a Russian militant website withdrawing their support from CE founder and leader Doku Umarov. The reason for the mutiny was Umarov’s Aug. 4 retraction of his Aug. 1 announcement that he was stepping down from the top leadership position. STRATFOR and many others noted at the time that the Aug. 1 resignation was unexpected and suggested that Umarov may have been killed. However, the Aug. 4 retraction revealed that Umarov was still alive and that there was considerable confusion over who was in control of the militant group.
The mutineers were all high-level members of the militant group: Hussein Gakayev, commander of the CE’s Chechen forces; Aslambek Vadalov, commander of Dagestani forces and to whom Umarov had briefly turned over control in his Aug. 1 resignation; an Arab commander named Muhannad; and a veteran field commander known as Tarkhan. The four CE commanders said Umarov’s renunciation showed disrespect for his subordinates and that, while the four leaders continued to pledge support to the CE, they no longer supported Umarov. Gakayev, Tarkhan and Muhannad had all appeared in a video that aired Aug. 1 in which they supported Umarov’s decision to appoint Vadalov CE emir.
To further confuse the issue, a video released Aug. 11 by Emir Adam, the CE leader in Ingushetia, pledged his and his followers’ loyalty to Umarov. The next day, another video appeared featuring the group’s new leader in Dagestan, Emir Seyfullakh Gubdensky (who succeeded Vadalov after he became deputy leader of the CE), similarly endorsing Umarov’s reclamation of the top CE post.
These disparate messages from top leaders paint a picture of confusion and dissension in the CE that appears to mark a serious crisis for a group, which, until recently, had been consolidating militant groups across the Caucasus under a single, more strategic leadership structure. STRATFOR has collected insight from sources familiar with the group and its leadership turmoil that explains what happened and the nature of the threat that the CE poses to Russian security in the Caucasus. Read the rest of this entry »
‘Iran closer to developing nuclear bombs’ Russia warns
Posted by Jack Sinclair in News, Threat Watch on 12/Jul/2010 18:19
Dmitry Medvedev has adopted a tougher line on Iran in recent months
“Russian President Dmitry Medvedev says Iran is “moving closer” to having the potential to create nuclear weapons.
Russia, which has strong economic and military ties with Iran, has traditionally been an ally of Tehran.
“Iran is moving closer to possessing the potential which in principle could be used for the creation of nuclear weapons,” Mr Medvedev told a meeting of ambassadors in Moscow.”
Kyrgyzstan and the Russian Resurgence
Posted by Brian in News, Threat Watch on 14/Apr/2010 21:14
This report is republished with permission of STRATFOR
By Lauren Goodrich
This past week saw another key success in Russia’s resurgence in former Soviet territory when pro-Russian forces took control of Kyrgyzstan.
The Kyrgyz revolution was quick and intense. Within 24 hours, protests that had been simmering for months spun into countrywide riots as the president fled and a replacement government took control. The manner in which every piece necessary to exchange one government for another fell into place in such a short period discredits arguments that this was a spontaneous uprising of the people in response to unsatisfactory economic conditions. Instead, this revolution appears prearranged.
A Prearranged Revolution
Opposition forces in Kyrgyzstan have long held protests, especially since the Tulip Revolution in 2005 that brought recently ousted President Kurmanbek Bakiyev to power. But various opposition groupings never were capable of pulling off such a full revolution — until Russia became involved.
In the weeks before the revolution, select Kyrgyz opposition members visited Moscow to meet with Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin. STRATFOR sources in Kyrgyzstan reported the pervasive, noticeable presence of Russia’s Federal Security Service on the ground during the crisis, and Moscow readied 150 elite Russian paratroopers the day after the revolution to fly into Russian bases in Kyrgyzstan. As the dust began to settle, Russia endorsed the still-coalescing government.
There are quite a few reasons why Russia would target a country nearly 600 miles from its borders (and nearly 1,900 miles from capital to capital), though Kyrgyzstan itself is not much of a prize. The country has no economy or strategic resources to speak of and is highly dependent on all its neighbors for foodstuffs and energy. But it does have a valuable geographic location.
Central Asia largely comprises a massive steppe of more than a million square miles, making the region easy to invade. The one major geographic feature other than the steppe are the Tien Shan mountains, a range that divides Central Asia from South Asia and China. Nestled within these mountains is the Fergana Valley, home to most of Central Asia’s population due to its arable land and the protection afforded by the mountains. The Fergana Valley is the core of Central Asia. Read the rest of this entry »
New Bomber Back From The Dead
The Defense Department has decided to resurrect a program for designing a new long range bomber. Could this be in response to the fact that Russia just unveiled their new stealth fighter?
In a press conference yesterday, Gates said the newly unveiled Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) renewed emphasis on the military’s need to counter “disruptive, high-tech capabilities†developed by future adversaries.