Does Russia Really Have "Superweapons"?

As Russia's invasion of Ukraine continues, Ben, Matt and Noel explore ongoing claims that the Russian government may possess secret "superweapons" capable of changing the course of war. How much of this is sound and fury, signifying nothing? How much of this may lead to new, world-threatening tools of horror? Ben here: it turns out what we mean by "super".

They don't want you to read our book.: https://static.macmillan.com/static/fib/stuff-you-should-read/

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:00):
From UFOs to psychic powers and government conspiracies. History is
riddled with unexplained events. You can turn back now or
learn the stuff they don't want you to know. A
production of iHeartRadio.

Speaker 2 (00:26):
Welcome back to the show. I Know I need to shave.
My name is Matt.

Speaker 3 (00:30):
Now you look like a gorgeous adonis of a man.

Speaker 4 (00:33):
They call me Ben. We're joined with our super producer
Max the freight train Williams because our compatriot, the Tennessee
Pal is on an adventure and will be returning soon.
Most importantly, you are you. You are here. That makes
this the stuff they don't want you to know. And look,

(00:53):
a lot of stuff is happening, folks. The Russian invasion
of Ukraine continues. It's been going on for years.

Speaker 3 (01:02):
That whole thing I thought we'd moved on. No, I'm joking.
I'm obviously joking. Just doesn't seem like it's front page
news as much anymore with all the other invasions taking place.

Speaker 4 (01:11):
Yeah, and that's a good point, because a lot of
Western media has slowly begun looking the other way, or
as you said, finding new stories, at least in the
United States. But amid all this chaos, we are returning
to a continual fascination of hours. It's one that dates
back to before the harrowing days of the earlier Cold War.

(01:35):
You see, in recent years, folks, Russia has made great
hay about the existence of new unparalleled toys, weapons of
mass destruction, weapons of war. So we clocked this a
few years back, and we're still asking is there any
sand to this? Does Russia really have? As Daddy V said,

(01:59):
new super weapons?

Speaker 3 (02:01):
Are we talking like doomsday device material, the stuff of
bond villains?

Speaker 4 (02:06):
Yeah, like specter level zar bamba stuff.

Speaker 2 (02:09):
Well, it's mostly new missile systems, right, missile systems that
are designed to get past missile defense systems. Right, That's
mostly what it is. But there's all kinds of stealthy
boys in there, and all kinds of other new toys
we're going to talk about.

Speaker 4 (02:26):
I'm excited about the submarines, for instance. Yeah. It's kind
of like a picture, at least the way Rush is
presenting it. Picture it like a fancy box of chocolates
hashtag no Forst. Gump or Gump if you want. But
remember the fancy boxes of chocolates where you open them
up and there'd be a little diagram of what kind

(02:46):
of chocolate each one.

Speaker 3 (02:47):
Was a legend, the chocolate box legend, the chocolate box end,
legend of the chocolate box legend. Yeah, I think we're
get my favorite lore.

Speaker 4 (02:58):
So per Russian statements for several years now, the idea
is that they have a secret box of very dangerous chocolates,
most of which, to that earlier point, seem to be
new iterations on existing technology. Well, you always got to
wonder if the bear has more badgers in its bag.

(03:21):
So that's what we're getting into tonight.

Speaker 3 (03:23):
We got a bear with a bag of badgers and
swinging it around willy and or nilly. This is scary stuff, y'all.
It takes a village. We'll be right back.

Speaker 4 (03:35):
Here are the facts, you guys. We all know the
term paper tiger, right. Have you guys heard that one?

Speaker 3 (03:42):
Yeah, it's like a little origami guy that you fold
up and you put on your windows sill. It keeps
you company.

Speaker 4 (03:48):
There we go. It's also slaying, at least in English,
for a thing that appears to be very threatening but
maybe doesn't deliver in practice. Bark versus bite situation.

Speaker 5 (04:02):
For sure, like like vaporware, but different and yeah, You
may have seen this trope played with a lot in
cinema where there will be a shadow of a giant,
terrifying looking thing coming towards you, but in fact it's
just a little toy or something, or it's a small
little critter, but it looks huge because of the placement

(04:22):
of the light in the shadow. Right, very similar concept
that can be played with here. The countries, countries all
the time, do all of them do this?

Speaker 3 (04:36):
Just can get every There can be bad way, there
can only bad be? How does it go?

Speaker 4 (04:41):
Sorry?

Speaker 3 (04:41):
Please continue?

Speaker 4 (04:43):
There can only bad be.

Speaker 3 (04:44):
No, it's the thing Trump said, He said, there can
there it can only good happen. It can only ye ye,
well sorry, no, no, no, We'll keep it. It can
only bad be.

Speaker 4 (04:54):
That's the opposite it happen. As a fan of Yoda
from the Star Wars universe, I agree with that syntax.
I mean, yeah, it's true.

Speaker 2 (05:03):
Though.

Speaker 4 (05:04):
I think we nailed the definition of paper tiger. And
it is a incredibly important point that every country spends
a lot of time thinking about its international posture. Right.
Every country wants to say, we're the ones who could
do this stuff. But you see, we're so cool that

(05:25):
we're not doing it. But we do have magic powers,
we're just not doing it.

Speaker 2 (05:29):
Also, it feels like a bunch of folks gathered around
a bar and everybody's drinking, and everybody's pretty drunk, and
there are a couple of guys that will always be like, huh,
what we want some of this? You don't want some
of this?

Speaker 4 (05:44):
You would have done this. I got the biggest knife.

Speaker 2 (05:48):
Oh are you just I'm not going to show it
to you because we're at a bar.

Speaker 4 (05:51):
No, you only saw this here. You only saw my
regular knife, not my secret knife, my secret knie.

Speaker 1 (06:00):
Yeah.

Speaker 4 (06:00):
For a lot of we know this. For a lot
of modern history, folks, Russia was considered to have one
of the world's most powerful militaries operating on one of
the planet's most brutal environments. And I think we all
remember during the halcyon days of the Soviet Union, there
was this empire stretching across Eurasia, was increasingly influencing the

(06:23):
Middle East, North Africa, having a bit of a dalliance
in Southeast Asia.

Speaker 2 (06:29):
I've seen it in pictures right, it represented, But I
don't remember a time when I viewed the Soviet Union
as this massive empire just because I never got I
guess I didn't have the cognitive ability to even think
about it as such when I was so young. It
is weird because I suppose my view of Russia and
the USSR really hasn't changed that much. I just didn't,

(06:52):
you know, we didn't get that experience of looking at
the newspapers when you know USSR does so and so,
like being blazoned across the top.

Speaker 3 (07:01):
Yeah.

Speaker 4 (07:02):
So for earlier generations, right, like they're saying, the Cold
War was more of an ever present thing in the zeitgeist, right,
like the Cuban missile crisis and so on.

Speaker 2 (07:13):
Yeah, yeah, yeah, And the.

Speaker 4 (07:16):
Soviet Union had this well deserved reputation for doing what
we call throwing bodies at the problem in conflicts, right,
a vast number of people in their armed services. But
we can't forget the Soviet Union. Despite Cold War propaganda
on both sides, the Soviet Union also heralded a great

(07:37):
many innovations that changed warfare and therefore the world at large.
Remember when we talked about the dead Hands system. That's
sup that supervillain bond level stuff.

Speaker 2 (07:49):
There you go, that's still terrifying. Well, I mean it
has to be it's obviously right, especially the fact that
they're not the only country that then developed a similar
dead hands indrome syndrome. What is that? What is the
impostor hands alien hand syndrome? Is that the thing?

Speaker 4 (08:08):
I believe that's correct? You like, let your hand fall
asleep and Jersey, where's that's just the stranger?

Speaker 3 (08:15):
Okay, thank you.

Speaker 4 (08:16):
The the impostor hand or whatever it's called syndrome is
a psychological condition where people believe that one or more
of their limbs are not part of them.

Speaker 2 (08:28):
Yeah, it's like operating on its own or something like that.
But sorry, I'd start for that aside, just knowing that
multiple countries now have a system like the one that
the USSR developed, which is, if everybody dies in our country,
the missile systems still function and will still strike you.

Speaker 4 (08:44):
Right, Yeah, that's correct, and please do check out our
previous episode on that where we go we go deep
into what that thing is, how it may or may
not work, and whether it actually works today, which is
all the big question for the Russian military. I mean,
this civilization puts spot Nick into space, they put the

(09:06):
first known satellite in orbit. They put Uri Gagard into space,
and brought that poor Poorlika or like like y'a.

Speaker 3 (09:16):
Without making it a spoiler, I'm just gonna say, there's
a thing that I've been enjoying a piece of media
where there is a plot point involving a fail safe
for the fail safe, where if there were mutually assured
destruction taking place, there is some sort of satellite mounted
e MP that would essentially shut out or knock out
all electrical devices on the entire planet, therefore preventing mutually

(09:38):
assured destruction where that to happen. And I thought that
was super cools.

Speaker 2 (09:44):
Can we do that?

Speaker 3 (09:44):
Yes, exactly. But I'm just saying I'm not gonna say
what show it was because it is a little bit
of a plot point. Don't want to be a spoiler,
but I thought it was a new thought experiment.

Speaker 4 (09:51):
It is tune into season six of Community.

Speaker 3 (09:54):
Exactly the movie, which I think is finally in the words, you.

Speaker 2 (09:58):
Know, if that did work, though, I imagine all of the
nuclear reactors around the world for power, they would all
go offline.

Speaker 3 (10:05):
Oh, it's a problem that's adressed in It's a problem
that's addressed in the show.

Speaker 4 (10:09):
It really really is.

Speaker 3 (10:10):
Oh yeah, oh big time yep.

Speaker 4 (10:11):
And let's not forget things like the humble AK forty seven,
another Soviet innovation that is one of the planet's most
well known firearms and pretty affordable at this point due
to economy of scale.

Speaker 2 (10:25):
The rifle that keeps on giving, huh, Like, so many
conflicts arout the world have been fueled by that weapon.

Speaker 4 (10:31):
Actually, the AK forty seven has, in limited regions been
used as a form of currency in the past. That's
how ubiquitous this firearm has become. Scary stuff everybody. We
do know that the Soviet Union fell, right, it dissolved,
but Russia, the Federated States thereof soldiered on and this

(10:55):
government was diplomatically is diplomatically put imperfect. But the world
at large, until just a few years ago, considered the
Russian army to be one of the absolute best on
the planet, second only to that of the United States.
So for decades, the rest of the world, especially the West,

(11:18):
especially NATO countries, all took great pains to avoid doing
what we call poking the bear too much or too often.

Speaker 3 (11:27):
Right, And you know, the bear is also just as
perfect analogy for Russia are pretty bear like.

Speaker 2 (11:33):
Just like the restaurant, but like what you mean there
is to avoid deliberate provocation, right, Or if Russia does
something that appears to be a little off, Let's say
NATO might consider Russia doing something that's a little that's
if the concept here is that NATO wouldn't come down

(11:54):
and do anything physical, you might have a resolution that says, hey,
we kind of don't we don't like that Russia did.

Speaker 4 (12:01):
That, guys, But no, Olivia Newton John right, it's not
let's get physical just yet.

Speaker 3 (12:10):
I mean exactly, it doesn't. I mean, it seems like
we're seeing so many aggressive tests of what NATO can
actually do these days, and it doesn't feel like it's
passing them very well. It feels like we're exposing just
how kind of again a matter of decorum something like
NATO actually is.

Speaker 4 (12:29):
Yeah, you never know until the rubber hits the road
or the ICBMs hit the horizon. It's funny because going
back to that earlier analogy about people hanging out with
agro folks at a restaurant or a bar, NATO was
NATO is like a crowd of people also in the
same establishment, and they're whispering to each other. They're like, oh, no,

(12:53):
don't mess with secret knife guy. You know, he's trying
to scoot over and call other seats at the don't
let him do it.

Speaker 2 (13:02):
Somebody within the group stands up, I call for a
resolution that secret knife guy be scolded immediately and yeah,
and then someone leans.

Speaker 4 (13:13):
Back and they're like, secret knife guy, you got you
got a weird vibe. No, don't come over here, No,
just it's your ViBe's off.

Speaker 2 (13:23):
Somebody stands up and like quietly just walks over to
secret knife guy and hands him a seat like a
little note.

Speaker 3 (13:29):
And immediately knifed.

Speaker 4 (13:32):
You're mad at you? Oh wait? Or are you mad
at us? Check? Yes or no?

Speaker 3 (13:38):
That's it.

Speaker 4 (13:39):
That's it.

Speaker 2 (13:39):
And this isn't to completely crap on, you know, initiatives
like the United Nations, like NATO and like these these
treaty organizations and attempts to work together and be more
unified right as a planet with governing bodies and that
kind of thing, because that is kind of the best
thing we've got going when it comes to cooperation and

(14:00):
seeing everybody as one species that's going through this whole
thing together. It's just in action. Maybe they're just not
as effective as we would hope they would be. Otherwise
we would right have the green revolution thing where pollution
is no longer even a concept on the planet. Would
have happened in the eighties.

Speaker 4 (14:22):
Yeah, exactly. You know, if every, if everything that modern
civilization put on paper with noble intent ended up one
hundred percent being put into practice, the world would be
a much better place. Right. But the thing is, what
we're saying is like a lot of these agreements, they
don't have teeth and they don't have the same funding

(14:44):
that bad faith actors have. That's ultimately, I think our
point like, they don't have.

Speaker 3 (14:49):
Teeth, but they lacking teeth they more than make up
for in gums too.

Speaker 4 (14:54):
They've got They've got gummy gummy words. And so let's
go back to Russia. We see here the ascension of
a guy named Vladimir Putin, the longtime effective ruler of
the new Russia. Please check out if you're having a
depressing time today when this episode publishes and you want

(15:19):
to have a little bit of a gallows chuckle, please
please please check out our classic episode on a weird
flex that Vladimir Putin did when he pushed through a
law that said any Russian president, whomever they may be,
is immune from any prosecution forever, no take.

Speaker 2 (15:40):
Back seats as long as this stuff they did while president. Yeah,
I think I think.

Speaker 4 (15:46):
That's an important caveat. Yeah, I think you're right.

Speaker 2 (15:48):
Yeah, And it's the same one that we currently have
in this country. Any official duties, you're immune, baby.

Speaker 4 (15:56):
Yeah. It's weird because the findings OFIS and the language
of that Russian law are kind of similar. Far be
it for me to say people were plagiarizing or drinking
from the same inspirational well, but the language is kind
of similar to your point. I mean, I don't we know.

(16:19):
Putin never thought the Cold War ended, like pretty much
everybody else on the planet until quite recently, had a
very high opinion of Russia's military might. And you can
hie thee to YouTube for instance, or your favorite video
platform of choice, and you can see multiple instances where

(16:39):
the Russian government, led by Putin or Medgev, has been
showcasing missile defense systems, stuff like the SM three hundred
or big contingents of troops marching through, tanks rolling through
And these are massive parades, right, Who doesn't love a
massive parade? There our events, guys, I'm sorry, I'm laughing,

(17:02):
not to get political, but do you remember when our
administration tried to have one of those parades.

Speaker 2 (17:08):
Do you guys remember that, Yeah, to celebrate the president
and his birthday.

Speaker 4 (17:14):
Yeah, nothing new.

Speaker 2 (17:16):
It was like a history of the military on display.
And there was a part of it that was interesting
to see the different the evolution, let's say, of the
weaponry and things like that were cool. Yeah, yeah, but
we didn't exactly, you know, roll through with the new
versions of the B two bomber or the stuff that

(17:38):
DARPA was working on, or the new stealth aircraft, or
we didn't do any of that, you know, and then
you see what what happened. It's twenty eighteen, right when
the big announcement occurs where Weimer putin is like, hey
we've got these super baby yes, right, yeah, that was

(17:58):
years ago. And then when we have one of these things,
it's just it didn't seem that impressive unfortunately. And I
don't mean, I don't mean to downplay the work of
any of the you know, military personnel or people who
are involved in the actual parade part. It's just it
didn't have that same thing like here's all our here's
all our ICBMs right that you know China would do maybe.

Speaker 4 (18:18):
Right, we didn't show the whole chocolate box. Going back
to that earlier in comparison, we said, here's some of
our good, old fashioned chocolate, and then we really want it.
And the world was saying, I know, beat me here
freight training. The world was saying, I know those motherers
have a gob stopper somewhere. They're just not putting it
out in the public. I mean, because we all know

(18:40):
that world powers are not content to stick with old
conventional goodies. Old conventional warfare. Research in Russia was a
huge leader in this. That during the days of the
Soviet Union and now they pioneered these bold, strange experiments
into unconventional and asymmetric initiatives, things like more exotic weaponry. Notably,

(19:07):
there's some of the best at propaganda and information compromise.
This had huge impact in foreign countries, including the United States.
It resulted in favorable policies for Russia abroad, and in
some cases it resulted in outright vassal states and regime change.
I mean, good luck voting in Moldova or Belarus. Honestly,

(19:31):
be careful, actually, if you're there, if you're listening now,
be careful.

Speaker 2 (19:36):
Oh yeah, really quickly. I'm just thinking about this as
you were talking. There have been when we think about
new weapons and militaries trying to stay on the cutting edge, right,
we often think about it being because they want a
technological advantage over any opponent and he perceived opponent who's
at that bar, right, they want the bigger knife or

(19:59):
the faster realistic missile or whatever. There's this other thing
that exists for every other country, and that is the
intertwining of that military sector, the official government sector, but
then the private sector that's actually manufacturing most of those weapons.
Even in Russia and anywhere in the country, there are
private sectors corporations that are involved with all this stuff

(20:23):
that need those sweet sweet quarterly profits in order to
stay afloat. And you can't not keep that in your
mind while you're thinking about this stuff, because it's way
more complicated than just a country wanting to be the
most powerful.

Speaker 4 (20:38):
There are a lot of calculations that go into it,
and some of them the public will never see unless
things go disastrously wrong for one actor or another. I
mean again, folks, the Putin administration has never considered the
Cold War over. In their opinion, stuff still isn't sweet.

(21:00):
And in recent years Russia has been in practice attempting
to resurrect the Soviet Empire of old. We're talking about
coordinated series of campaigns, especially in its former sphere of influence,
rigging elections, touching politicians, turning nearby nations into puppet states.

(21:22):
A most notable example of this attempt to resurrect the
Soviet Empire is the invasion of Ukraine, which began so
long ago now, February twenty fourth, twenty twenty two. It's
been going on for years at this point, and it
doesn't really show any signs of stopping unless I'm missing something.

Speaker 2 (21:45):
No, not at all. We saw the Ukrainian president putting
out public statements about how worried he is that the
Iran conflict is going to so overshadow what's occurring in Ukraine,
that his country is going to lose all support from
the West, which is you know, all of Europe, the
United States, that all these folks that have been providing

(22:07):
aid to Ukraine. It's that thing we talked about the
top of the show, right, So much stuff going on,
the public interest kind of just moves away for a while,
and now it's well, how do we get aid to
another country, right, or how do we protect a different
group of people.

Speaker 3 (22:24):
It's a lot of that flooding the zone stuff where
we can literally hold so many things in our minds
at one time. And whether it's by design or just
the nature of events stacking upon events, I think we
all kind of think it might be partially by design,
but yeah, it's a lot.

Speaker 4 (22:38):
Yeah, And we know that even leading up to the
current conflict in Ukraine, there were known economic strains, sanctions,
a lot of corruption and maintenance issues throughout the Russian infrastructure,
military and civilian alike. So there was already a great

(23:00):
deal of festering skepticism about whether Russia was a real
tiger militarily or a paper tiger. But a lot of
folks still, despite the skepticism leading up to twenty twenty two,
they believe that Russia's foray into Ukraine unilateral and rationalized

(23:21):
by several different announcements. They thought this conflict, this invasion,
would be swift and decisive, and they said, in less
the West intervenes, the Russian army is going to roll
through Ukraine like lightning. The locals are outnumbered, outmatched, out gunned.
But this was not the case, like Russia's army really

(23:43):
fumbled the bag. The military had all these has these
serious issues that impede its performance. Supply chains breakdown, inadequate training,
bad opsec, outdated equipment. They're running out of munitions. I mean,
for Pete's sake, they had to conscript some soldiers from
DPRK just to be cannon fodder. Essentially. I don't know.

(24:08):
I don't think they were as good as we thought
they were. But maybe that's also a conspiracy, because maybe
our military industrial complex during the Cold War was embellishing
or over selling Soviet capabilities in order to get more funding.

Speaker 3 (24:23):
The evil empire of it all, there's certain optics that
goes into having a relatively well matched rival.

Speaker 2 (24:30):
You know, it's so puzzling to me that there could
be a conflict like what's happening in Ukraine go on
for so long, and that a large country like Russia
would just continue that waging war in that way and
pumping millions and billions of dollars into it. And we've

(24:54):
I feel as though all of us have learned lessons
about what occurred during the Cold War where there are
all of these different fronts right where there's all kinds
of conflict that's occurring that's not actually you know about
what's going on in Afghanistan at the time. It's actually
these two countries pouring resources in and attempting to be

(25:14):
victorious in some kind of weird war of attrition kind
of thing. It feels like that is happening now in Ukraine,
Like it's got to be happening to some extent in
the whole conflict with the Ukraine, and it's also now
happening with the United States in Iran where we're just
pumping money into it.

Speaker 3 (25:33):
Both of which seemed to have been conflicts that were
cast as like it will be in and out type situations. Yeah,
I mean, at least from a public relations standpoint, that
seems to be what Russia wanted the world to think
about what was going to happen in Ukraine, that they
were you know, outmatched and outgunned, and that fully ended

(25:54):
up not being the case.

Speaker 2 (25:55):
Well, it appears to be the same thing with the
United States right in Iran, so like yeah, yeah, so
it's just so puzzling to me if it's not just
a play to manufacture more missiles and more a munitions
and more weapons. If it's not that, then I don't
get it understood.

Speaker 4 (26:14):
I mean, this is definitely not to say that the
Russian military isn't dangerous. It is still ranked as the
number two military in the world currently by all the
boffins and all our fellow war nerds. And the conflict,
as we said, it's it's definitely a quagmire. A continued
hashtag no family guy, it continues to rage. We've seen

(26:38):
a revolution in drone warfare, electronic warfare, energy based war.
We've also heard a lot of cryptic announcements coming out
of Russia, some by Daddy V himself, alluding to what
they call new unprecedented super weapons, things that, according to
the pr and thes, if deployed these things, these new

(27:03):
toys could fundamentally alter the course of conflict. But what
are they exactly? Does Russia really have quote unquote new
super weapons. We'll tell you after word from our sponsor.
Here's where it gets crazy. Yeah, kind of depending on

(27:28):
what we mean by new and what we mean by super.
At least we tease this a little bit earlier. There
was a twenty eighteen presidential address to the Federal Assembly
of Russia, and while speaking there, Putin had what the
West calls a fiery rant. You know, he was coming

(27:49):
in hot, he was dropping bars. He publicly announced six
new weapons systems that were potentially dual use or explicitly
designed to deliver nuclear payloads. We can get into those
six again, it's twenty eighteen, just so you know, when

(28:11):
he was doing this, most of them had not seen
actual combat.

Speaker 2 (28:16):
Yeah, but some of them had been in development for
a long long time, like the first one we're going
to talk about here, the avant Garde, the avant Garde
hypersonic glide missile. This is this is a piece of
technology that was developed way back in the eighties, or
at least the hypers The concept of a hypersonic missile

(28:39):
started back in the eighties. And this one has this
one's been tested were there have been approximately fourteen flights
test flights, let's say, of this avant Garde system between
nineteen ninety and twenty eighteen, which there have been likely
many more since that time looking at reporting that occurred

(29:01):
around the time that these were announced by Daddy've lad there,
but it is it is potentially a very scary, extremely
fast missile that could potentially get past some of the
more conventional defenses that exist throughout the planet.

Speaker 4 (29:17):
Right like he could screw up an iron dome, for instance.
It also it's very tricky to catch stuff this fast
and this sophisticated in mid air. So shout out to
anybody who's ever accidentally rolled a NAT twenty on dexterity
reaction and had something thrown at you and you catch
it without looking. That's what missile interceptor systems are designed

(29:42):
to do. And all of these things become especially important
as the United States withdraws from another what do you
call it, no, A gummy mouthed treaty, the Anti Ballistic
Missile Treaty. The US ghosted that one and Russia said, cool,
I'm down. Let me show you some of my secret knives,

(30:05):
which to that earlier point have been in development for
a long time. Most of the six publicly announced quote
unquote super weapons from twenty eighteen were missiles, and they
were building on earlier research, So nothing like Shyamalan plot twisting.

Speaker 3 (30:21):
I gotta say, I really dig the name of this
first one, but I keep reading it as the avant
garde hypersonic like as some sort of like theater project. No,
it is, in fact the avant garde hypersonic glide vehicle.
What's that about? That sounds like a batmobile type situation.

Speaker 4 (30:36):
Right, Like as Matt was saying, this has been this
one was in development before the nineties, like this is
a Cold War boy that they figured out how to
how to make work. But I don't believe. I can't
remember if that's one of the two that was actively
deployed in combat yet. I don't think that's one.

Speaker 3 (30:57):
No.

Speaker 2 (30:59):
According to Missile Threat, which is a website you can
visit and check out, they're talking about in December twenty eighteen,
how it was test fired and it traveled six thousand
kilometers before striking a test target just quickly. As a
primer here we kind of know this. I needed to
remind myself what it means. The concept of a ballistic

(31:22):
missile versus like a surface to air missile or there
are all kinds of different ones. Air to surface. A
ballistic missile is designed to go on a very steep
arc into the air, sometimes reaching almost into space, if
not into space, and then come down at a very
steep arc to hit a target somewhere. The concept with

(31:45):
these like a hypersonic glide missile. That word glide is
very important because it can get up to extremely high altitudes,
then glide to where it needs to go. Then as
it's coming down to its target, it can make maneuvers
while it's getting there, theoretically evade being struck by let's say,
a missile defense system.

Speaker 3 (32:04):
Okay, because in the illustration for this it looks almost
like a stealth bomber. But this is an unmanned thing,
Like the vehicle is a little misleading here, vehicle.

Speaker 4 (32:13):
In terms of non human passengers. So vehicle for a payload.

Speaker 3 (32:19):
There you go.

Speaker 4 (32:20):
It could be it could be outfitted with nuclear capability,
which a lot of people are worried.

Speaker 3 (32:26):
Understood.

Speaker 4 (32:28):
Oh oh, and while we're talking about nuclear powered stuff,
let's go to the second super weapon that Putin was pitching,
the nine seven point thirty. Make sure you get this right,
buravist Nick nuclear powered cruise missile.

Speaker 2 (32:45):
Yeah.

Speaker 4 (32:46):
Yeah, a lot of fun at parties, is our buddy Vlad? Actually,
I bet he's pretty wild at parties.

Speaker 2 (32:52):
Oh yeah, taking that shirt off Steeler, stealing people's watches
and rings.

Speaker 4 (32:58):
Angela Merkele you don't like dogs. That's funny because I
have several for us right now in the meeting.

Speaker 2 (33:04):
Yeah, there we go of this one. This one theoretically
is pretty scary because the I was going to say,
I'd say the propaganda around it, the announcements around it,
are that it can reach anywhere on Earth. So ballistic
missiles or one thing, intercontinental ballistic missiles are the ones

(33:28):
that can go thousands of miles or you know, many
thousand kilometers something like this. Theoretically, if it existed, you
could launch it and then it could go almost, if
not all the way around the world.

Speaker 4 (33:43):
Yeah, because a cruise missile is it's staying within Earth's atmosphere.
But think of it like a small airplane, right, and
all the passengers on that airplane are munitions of some sort,
so all the passengers suck. You don't want them to land.

(34:03):
But because it is sophisticated enough to fly like small aircraft,
it is more difficult to intercept and it can do
complex maneuvers. Because okay, so unlike ballistic missiles, a cruise missile,
if I remember correctly, will use jet engines for sustained

(34:26):
flight at low altitudes, which also makes it tougher for
radar to detect them. Pretty nasty stuff. I mean, it's
definitely no. Three m twenty two zir Con. What a segue.

Speaker 2 (34:39):
Yeah, yeah, let's get to that, but really quickly, just
to send people if they want to learn about this
and how this specific well keep saying the name one
more time than the one we were just talking about.
Oh thenk okay, this one has talked about in November
twenty twenty five by Al Jazeera. You can look this

(34:59):
up revolutionary about Russia's nuclear powered missile experts, and you
can just see how people are talking about or thinking
about it versus the way Russia would, you know, would
present it when it's coming out. But I think there's
probably a reality somewhere between those two, you know, visions

(35:20):
of reality. There's something in there where it's a crazy
dangerous thing if you get it right. It's just testing
it enough times successfully that it would be trustworthy in
a combat situation.

Speaker 4 (35:33):
Right, and bleeding money the entire time you're doing that,
R and D if you what a I think a
pretty fair read on this comes from Parth Satam writing
for The Aviationist in October twenty twenty five, where he
puts in some of the same caveats. Russia claims the

(35:54):
Buddhaivist nuclear powered missile flew fourteen thousand clicks in fifteen hours.
So Russia is making a lot of big claims. You know,
they're that guy at the restaurant saying I do have
a secret knife, and other people are saying, yeah, we
know about knives. Man, you're not. You're not like King

(36:14):
of the Knives.

Speaker 3 (36:15):
But how you heard of knife hands?

Speaker 4 (36:18):
Right? You heard it.

Speaker 3 (36:19):
That's got hand discussion from the time of the knife.

Speaker 4 (36:22):
Yeah, nailed it, nailed it. Uh. The third thing here,
the three M twenty two Zircon SS in thirty three. Uh.
It is an anti ship hypersonic cruise missile, so working
like the Bavistnik. Obviously they're taking some of the same

(36:43):
research and applying it to different things. This bad boy
is supposed to wallop watercraft. Okay, So they're saying, oh,
nice job building your carriers, thank you for spending billions
of dollars on that pop pop.

Speaker 2 (37:00):
Again in theory terrifying because those aircraft carriers are they
do represent the blue water superiority of the United States, right, yeah.

Speaker 4 (37:11):
And we can't those are not things that we can
fart out replacements for on like four thirty Friday evening.

Speaker 3 (37:18):
You know.

Speaker 2 (37:19):
No, we're talking years build.

Speaker 4 (37:22):
Yeah, yeah, and you have to it takes so long
to build these that you also have to have bipartisan
support from two political parties that clearly don't like each other.

Speaker 2 (37:37):
Oh hey, but didn't they just didn't the government in
this country just pass something at least to help TSA. Yeah,
they are trying to.

Speaker 3 (37:48):
Know, well, they didn't pass it, but it's going for
a vote.

Speaker 4 (37:52):
It's going for a vote. It's also occurring in step
with the plans for the current president to have his
signature on all currency going forward. I know, I wish
I was like, how could I dollars be more legitimate?
I got to stop forging the president's signature on these.

Speaker 3 (38:13):
Every time, and now signed by a king.

Speaker 4 (38:17):
Oh boy, there we have it. You could have that
one for free, current president. Uh. The next one is
the k H four seven M two. We can run
through these quickly. Kinsol. It is a hypersonic air launched
ballistic missile. So this comes from planes, right, This is
this is pretty cool. This is not surface to air.

(38:40):
They're already in the air. Again, if it works. It works.
The one, guys, the one I'm most excited about, for
very nerdy reasons, is the Poseidon unmanned underwater vehicle. So
it's a submarine drone and I have high hopes for that.

(39:00):
I shouldn't say it that way, we'll keep it in,
but I mean the technology is very interesting for sure.

Speaker 3 (39:06):
It's a great name too, the Poseidon Adventure. The unmanned
underwater vehicle. This is something that is like a a
submarine drone that is said to be able to like
manipulate the weather in a way. I mean it creates tsunamis.
That's not really a manipulat in the weather, but it's
recreating a feature of weather that's kind of intense.

Speaker 4 (39:29):
Man. Yeah, we I think we talked about this a
few years ago and the news first broke. But the
the idea here is that this thing can, as you said, Noel,
literally create tsunamis. Underwater unmanned vehicles are only going to
become more important in the near to mid horizon. I

(39:51):
think we all saw the news as well about how
China is using subs to create a very comprehensive map
of the Arctic.

Speaker 3 (40:00):
Remember those German U boats that were such a huge
part of that war effort. I mean, gosh, history repeating
like it's a covert. They're small, they're able to really
get in there, and now they can make tsunamis. So
what's not to love?

Speaker 4 (40:16):
What's not to love? Ten ted No notes, great hustle
everybody radioactive tsunamis. Oh yeah, yeah we should mention that part. Yeah,
I would join forces with the radioactive wasps.

Speaker 3 (40:29):
We'd have a good.

Speaker 4 (40:30):
Time the radioactive feral hogs.

Speaker 2 (40:34):
You know what I mean, it's just insane. Two hundred
kilometers per hour, that's one hundred and twenty miles per hour, zigzagging,
avoiding detection, creating radioactive tsunami.

Speaker 4 (40:46):
Yeah, nothing weird. If you want to learn more, go
to Army Recognition dot com, where you'll see an announcement
from Naval News the headline Russia claims successful launch of
Poseidon nuclear submarine drone said to create tsunamis. So that
was a banger in the address he gave in twenty eighteen,

(41:09):
and he had one more closer.

Speaker 3 (41:11):
But before we get to that, just.

Speaker 2 (41:12):
Pointing out the superiority that is on display here theoretically
every time is this concept of a scramjet that you
add to your cruise missile that allows that cruise missile
to actually move and maneuver. You're adding the gliding capability
to your ICBM so that it can make maneuvers and

(41:34):
get away from those brand new f thirty fives or
whatever you're trying to throw at it. And in this
case with Poseidon, it can zigzag around as people are
trying to intercept it. That is I think the scary
thing because there are a ton of anti ballistic missile
anti all types of missile technologies that are out there,

(41:56):
and they range from everything to these micro microwave weapons,
laser weapons, conventional weapons with other missiles that are designed
to go up and catch one as it's coming in.
We're seeing those on display a ton right now with
what's going on with Iran. It's just if these things

(42:17):
are real, they are so representative of superiority over other abilities.

Speaker 4 (42:24):
Yeah. Yeah, because they're greased pigs. That's the thing, like
the old country trope of people getting together and trying
to catch a greased pig. Because these things are nimble
and agile. If they work the way they're supposed to work,
then they are out matching current interception capabilities, and the

(42:46):
Russian government was quite explicit about this. They were saying,
Uncle Sam can't get us. Like, guys, we know all
the tennis rackets you have, right, we know all the
what are those things in lacrosse they used to catch
the ball shuttlecocks.

Speaker 3 (43:02):
No, that.

Speaker 4 (43:04):
That's the scoop.

Speaker 3 (43:05):
It's called the scoop.

Speaker 4 (43:06):
The scoop. They're like, we thank you.

Speaker 3 (43:08):
I wish maybe that's true descriptive, it's true.

Speaker 4 (43:15):
Yes, yeah, they say, we've we know Uncle Sam, all
the scoopy nets you have, and you will not be
able to scoopy net these bad balls we're gonna throw
at you. And it this leads to stuff like the
RS twenty eight. This was Putin's closer, the r S
twenty eight Sarmat Liquid fueled in I r V equipped

(43:39):
super heavy ICBM. Now one problem with that name. I
don't think it's fair to our buddy Sarmat to body
shame them super heavy. Come on, come on, that's rude.
Maybe there's a translation thing.

Speaker 2 (43:53):
Well, I've seen the new season of South Park and
this thing's also known as Satan too, and Satan's a
beefy boy.

Speaker 4 (44:03):
He's a chalky boy. He's a choky boy. He makes
an impression.

Speaker 3 (44:07):
He's also a kept woman.

Speaker 4 (44:09):
Yes, yeah in South part.

Speaker 3 (44:12):
Yeah, I don't know, and you can apply that to
Satan a large nose that I don't know.

Speaker 2 (44:19):
I just trying to make a joke just because this
is Saing is known in the West as the Satan Too,
which is you know, it's a very metal name.

Speaker 3 (44:28):
It's Satan Too. It's it's like the first Baptist church.
There can only be one, but yet there are many.

Speaker 4 (44:34):
Yeah, I mean the SS eighteen Satan is an ICBM
that's been around for a while, and it was aging.
So this closer super weapon pitch is really just say
we're replacing the earlier thing.

Speaker 2 (44:50):
Can we talk about why this one is so terrifying though?

Speaker 3 (44:52):
Sure?

Speaker 2 (44:53):
This is another one of these intercontinental ballistic missiles, and
it is designed to kloy sixteen independently targetable nuclear warheads.
So you shoot one off, then sixteen targets in different
places can be hit with a nuke.

Speaker 4 (45:12):
Yeah, and those are sixteen is the the upper limit
of the distinct warheads it can deploy. It can also
just do ten large warheads, but overall it can carry
ultimately ten tons of payload. So if they wish ten
tons of nuclear weaponry, this is a world ending thing,

(45:35):
or a region ending thing at the very least.

Speaker 2 (45:38):
Oh yeah, and what region are we worried about?

Speaker 4 (45:40):
Oh?

Speaker 2 (45:40):
This thing can go eleven thousand miles and can easily
reach Europe in the United States?

Speaker 4 (45:46):
Yeah, so what region, folks? Most of them, most of them,
most of them North Sentinel Island. Don't poke the bear,
all right, that's not going to be your first international friend.
But as we said, only two of these six wishless
things from twenty eighteen have seen combat. The rest are

(46:06):
still under or in some phase of development. This sounds
good or terrifying in a pr speech or a propaganda initiative.
But here is the billiant ruble question, fellow conspiracy realist.
Do these things actually work? And what else are they

(46:27):
building in there? We'll be back afterword from our sponsors.
We've returned, guys. It's so weird. We think about asymmetry
quite a bit. Right. Ever since the behavior of colonists
in the American Revolution, right when they deployed Gettia tactics,

(46:51):
we have seen great advantage in flipping the script of
conventional warfare. These things aren't really flipping the script. Yeah,
they don't appear to have radically altered the calculations involved
in war, or they definitely haven't done it to the
level that cheaply made drones have. I think we can

(47:12):
agree that cyber warfare and drone warfare are two of
the biggest game changers in modern conflicts today. Right.

Speaker 2 (47:23):
Oh, yeah, We've been talking about a lot, especially in
the Ukraine conflict, and then now way on these relatively
cheap drones that are essentially just missiles that you know,
can go and explode any anywhere, and it costs like
fifty five thousand dollars versus you know, a million dollars
to shoot one down if you're using the defense shield systems.

(47:45):
But there is stuff that Russia's been developing. Did you
see this thing that s seventy ocotnik ok h O
t n I k B. It looks like it looks
like one of these stealth planes that you know, Lockeyed
creator or whoever on this side created, But it's a

(48:06):
stealth drone and it's it's huge, sixty five foot wingspan.
And there was one that allegedly went into Ukrainian airspace
and then you know, crashed and was recovered, but then
Russian forces like shot a missile to attack it to
make sure the other side didn't get their technology. Uh yeah, yeah,

(48:27):
but it looks it looks scary like a stealth drone.
Thing that looks like a stealth bomber.

Speaker 4 (48:32):
Yeah. And some of these, not just that one, but
like the shah Head and I think the Saga a
couple other ones there. We suspect that they were built
at least partially inspired by captured US drone technology or
UAV technology. It's it's the hot new thing in war

(48:55):
and unmanned drone they're much to your point, they're much
easier and cheaper to construct, and they also have the
added advantage of bleeding out your opponent's resources. Right, so
even if they catch one of the drones you have launched,
they have lost millions of dollars. You lost fifty five grand.

(49:18):
You know, eventually those numbers add up. Got to say, though,
part of the reason that these super weapons from twenty
eighteen have yet to create super results is due to
the fact that Russia has not used these in a
wartime nuclear capability. It seems that nuclear warfare is still

(49:42):
a rubicon. It's still a red line that no one,
not even Russia, has the appetite to cross.

Speaker 3 (49:49):
So far, so far, May the Cold War rage on.

Speaker 4 (49:53):
We're recorded on Friday, March twenty seventh. We don't know
how that statement will age.

Speaker 2 (49:58):
Stop, Ben, I'm scared. I just don't like saying things
out loud here.

Speaker 3 (50:03):
Sometimes I'm not not scared. But you know, we persevere,
keep on, yeah.

Speaker 4 (50:13):
Yeah, stay calm and carry We know that analysts are
increasingly afraid that after some unknown threshold of stress, because
Russia is not doing well domestically, after some unknown stress threshold,
Russia might simply say screw it and let the bombs fly.

(50:33):
Their nuclear strategy is an episode all its own. But
I think one of the big worries is that these
super weapons don't stop with the six toys we name.
Twenty eighteen was the better part of ten years ago.
And it's not like people in Russia put their pencils
down and sat on their laurels. They are still doing stuff.

Speaker 2 (50:56):
Oh what okay, you guys off topic. Recently on Strange News,
we talked about an update to the General McCastle and
missing Missing General Mcastle and story we target.

Speaker 3 (51:07):
It keeps coming up.

Speaker 2 (51:08):
Yeah, Multie, sorry, I one note recently with that whole thing.
But the the thing we talked about is that supposed
X account that may have been his and talking about
another general that allegedly took his own life, and the
allegations there, at least from the X account, were that
that person took their life because they didn't want to
allow nuclear weapons into private sector hands and that should

(51:33):
only be done from you know, Department of Energy to
military handoff. I don't think we even talked about much, guys,
but thinking about why would maybe a private company want
to get their hands on a nuke? Can you can
you guys think of a reason?

Speaker 3 (51:51):
Think of a bunch?

Speaker 2 (51:53):
Well, I could think of one. Yeah, if a private
company gets a hold of it and then set one
off somewhere on the planet that a military officially didn't do,
you could maybe blame that on any military you wanted to.
I don't know that that that terrifies me because we're

(52:15):
talking about this as you know, potential enemies with Russia
against other you know, countries of the United States against
other countries. What if it's a third party actor that
does it on behalf of somebody as a way to
begin the varrage.

Speaker 3 (52:30):
Well, sure, like in like inn Watchmen.

Speaker 4 (52:32):
A nuclear power, a nuclear powered Haliburton Tonkin. The false
flag is right, the false flag of it all.

Speaker 3 (52:39):
But also, like I mean, isn't the reason we're so
against nuclear proliferation is because if you have the nukes,
then you're sort of on an equal playing field in
terms of that mutually assured destruction. And as we already
start to see corporations taking on the role of government,
is it that far of a walk for a corporation
to say we've got nukes now to y'all.

Speaker 4 (52:57):
Like Grobolgar are on the way. We're getting very shadow run,
very cyberpunk, very quickly.

Speaker 3 (53:05):
Oh very fallout none, I said, And the nukes are
being sold to the highest bidder.

Speaker 4 (53:10):
I mean, oh yeah, broken arrows, rogue nukes. Right, It's
a fear that is as old as as old as
back when Oakridge, Tennessee was a secret city. We know
that Russia. Look, we're in a glasshouse, all right, folks
are wearing a glass daka. All the world powers are

(53:33):
conducting research into secretive technology. The US, China, European countries,
they all do similar things to one degree or another,
and they're all very careful not to spill the beans
on their latest homework. So then our question has to
be coom. I don't know how deep we want to
get into this. Would Russia have other stuff we don't

(53:56):
know about aside from the publicly announced breakthroughs. Does the
have more super weapons up at sleeve?

Speaker 2 (54:03):
Okay, so we're talking about a lot of unmanned aircraft,
a lot of ballistic missiles that have pretty extensive electronics
going on signals that you are coming from either satellites
or ground based radar systems. We're talking about advanced toys
that use a lot of signals. Another thing that Russia

(54:24):
has been working on as well as the United States
are electronic warfare systems. We've looked at some of those
that use microwaves, some of them that just disrupt all
of the electronics or the radar signals, so you can
knock let's say a group of drones out of the sky,
or potentially a ballistic missile that is being using a
targeting system, right, you could disable that with some kind

(54:47):
of electronic warfare. And Russia's been doing that stuff for
a long time as well as the US and other superpowers.
But you can look up something called, I think it's
a Krasuka. There's a Krasuka four, which is this really
interesting looking wheels based system that you just aim at

(55:07):
places and disrupt all the electronics. It sounds very similar
to the things Donald Trump described when we went into Venezuela,
allegedly not only using this discompopulator thing to disrupt the
human beings, but disrupt all of the electronics, including the
electrical grid.

Speaker 4 (55:26):
Yeah, and this goes into things like emp or energy interference. Right,
Why should we spend billions of dollars making a thing
when we can just spend you know, a million or
so building something that can.

Speaker 3 (55:43):
Break your toy?

Speaker 4 (55:44):
Right, It's again, it's a symmetry. There's something beautiful to
it for students of the greatest art. But this does
also inevitably result in the loss of human lives, often
innocent people. So the stakes are very high. I mean,
don't we don't have to relitigate one of our favorite

(56:06):
examples of possible superweapons, the directed energy weapons. We talked
about the stunning expos a led by sixty Minutes that
makes a pretty persuasive case about Havana syndrome. We should
probably we should probably talk a little bit about the
cyber warfare, because missiles aside, right, missile killers aside, and

(56:31):
nuclear weaponry aside. In the age of ubiquitous information, in
the age where people are always online, it is impossible
to overstate the massive influence of Russia's info and cyber
warfare initiatives. I mean, they've compromised so many things. I
don't know if you guys saw the news, but about

(56:53):
I want to say, two or three days ago before
we recorded, the FBI publicly confirmed that Russian hackers who
are totally not state supported, have hijacked Signal and WhatsApp accounts.
Do you guys who use Signal or WhatsApp? I like WhatsApp, Yeah,
I've got what's app.

Speaker 3 (57:11):
It's great for international travel and communication, and like it
does a lot of robust features that regular old texting
doesn't do. It sends much higher resolution images, and you
can do really cool sorting. Signal Signal I don't know,
I don't really mess with I don't really have a
use case for that one.

Speaker 4 (57:26):
They're both supposed to be encrypted, though, is the pickle
of it? You know, That's why people who might be
having an organic protest. Love this kind of stuff where
people who are worried about big government cracking down on them.
I mean, these guys definitely are state supported in practice,
but officially kind of like Chinese hackers, they're working on

(57:48):
their own steam, inspired by patriotism. Camera see cut into
me here so we can see the eye roll.

Speaker 2 (57:58):
Oh my god, I went all the way back and
around to the front again.

Speaker 4 (58:02):
Oh I'm just patriotic. Well that's why I'm the best
hacker in this. Oh no, I'm not paid. This is
just my hobby. This is my Saturday. What guys, that's wonderful.

Speaker 2 (58:19):
Could we jump to the Moon really fast?

Speaker 3 (58:21):
Sure? I don't know. Do we have the technology?

Speaker 2 (58:23):
Matt, It seems like maybe we don't.

Speaker 3 (58:28):
I think it's the Moon jump. Let's just do it, yeah, figuratively.

Speaker 2 (58:33):
It is kind of weird to see this renewed desire
from the US, China, and Russia to get to the Moon,
to create a base, to have superiority in space, so
that you know, whoever you are, you get to control
who gets to come up and do what.

Speaker 4 (58:51):
It'll just be called.

Speaker 3 (58:51):
Moon Base one.

Speaker 4 (58:53):
I hope they come up with a cooler name. I'd
like something from Greco Roman or Chinese mythology. But yeah,
But the thing is, sometimes these entities will spend a
lot of blood, sweat and treasure, not because they would

(59:13):
ordinarily want a thing, but because they don't want the
other people to have it right very highland or rules.
So you might not be excited about your moon base,
but then you hear you know, uncle, she is doing it,
and you're going, ah, I hate that guy. He was
so mean to me at Chili's earlier. I'm going to
get a moon base. That's kind of what's happening, because.

Speaker 2 (59:35):
That's there, and that seems way far off, like honestly,
not even something to necessarily worry about at this moment.
But the thing that does worry me some of the
stuff we were looking at several years ago on this
show about rogue satellites and stuff like X thirty seven
B that can you know, be in orbit for four

(59:56):
hundred days and potentially move around and interact with other
satellites or stuff that I think I do believe it
was stuff that the United States officially observed, gosh before
twenty twenty five, where there were Russian satellites that grouped
together they moved and grouped together around other satellites and

(01:00:17):
were able to target other things in orbit, which again
is pretty scary, especially given the ambitions that we've been
hearing about whether or not it's real or true or
how close anybody is. But the concept of putting some
type of nuclear weapon, whether it's just on a satellite
that's orbiting around, that you could detonate after getting it

(01:00:40):
close to another target and then take out a whole
group of satellites that say the US controls, and then
you take down all the GPS capabilities. I mean, that
stuff's kind of scary because it doesn't just affect militaries. Guys.
Imagine a nuclear explosion in orbit right now that's already
so congested that we've talked about so many times, and

(01:01:02):
just exploding parts all around, like in a huge swath
in orbit.

Speaker 3 (01:01:08):
Have we modeled out I'm sure someone has what that
would look like, like, yeah, okay, I'm curious. It seems
like it would have a very deleterious effect on the atmosphere,
and you know, yeah, corresponding layers and such.

Speaker 4 (01:01:23):
Absolutely, that's a great way to put it, because then
we're so we study this a lot in academia, and
I'm sure the boffins in the US or Western military
study this as well. China certainly does. The issue is
that that becomes what we call total war. Total war

(01:01:44):
is a situation in which all enemy forces are treated
as combatants. All infrastructure, all resource, all resources, all institutions
are up for grabs, are all considered viable targets. And
when you run the I mean, the UN spent a

(01:02:06):
lot of time trying to get people to not weaponize space.
We'll see how that gummy toothed agreement goes. But when
you do something like this, you're detonated a bomb in traffic,
which means that all the other things, even if they're
not directly hit by the explosion, all the other things
on those orbital paths, if they cannot modify their trajectory

(01:02:30):
or you know, if they don't have a little thrusters
or some kind of mechanism to get themselves away from
the car accident, then they're going to get screwed up too.
So there will be an add on effect. It's a
domino effect in space.

Speaker 2 (01:02:43):
Very yeah, well, not to mention. In twenty twenty one,
China launched a hypersonic missile from space, right from space,
and at that time US generals called it very concerning.

Speaker 3 (01:02:58):
I would agree with that prognosis.

Speaker 2 (01:03:01):
Yeah, I mean, you know, we just I don't know, man,
the ambitions of these folks which just astonishing.

Speaker 4 (01:03:11):
Right, Well, while we're talking about space in general, let's
return to the digital space, because there is something that
we do have to talk about, which is the concept
of influencing elections and the concept of influencing officials. Right,
you don't need a Manchurian candidate if you can just

(01:03:32):
get some compromitt I would say, that's another Russian super weapon.
It's as old as the Soviet Union. But I think
AI is going to change it. I think machine learning
and big data are going to trigger a renaissance in
compromat activities. How would we define compromat. It's a cool word,

(01:03:53):
but we all know what it means.

Speaker 3 (01:03:54):
Blackmail stuff.

Speaker 4 (01:03:55):
Yeah, blackmail stuff. We know numerous political things have been
targeted by Russian compromat operations, and even more people, including
people in the United States, have been accused of playing
into Russian hands. I mean, guys, am I am I
off base? Am I bubbled in saying that it is
now a relatively common belief that the current US president

(01:04:20):
has somehow been compromised by Russia.

Speaker 3 (01:04:22):
It's definitely a pretty broadly held belief. The question is,
you know, what percentage and what affiliation those who believe
that are. I certainly do, and evidence seems to point
to that day in and day out. But you know,
there's a lot of really mentally flexible folks that are

(01:04:44):
making some arguments against it.

Speaker 2 (01:04:46):
So you know, the question is, how do you prove it? Well, exactly,
We've seen allegations against like Tulci, Gabbard and a bunch
of other folks who appear to have been taking actions
that would benefit Russia. Let's say we have seen the
administration doing that, right, But it's like, you know, can
we actually prove it?

Speaker 4 (01:05:06):
No? Yeah, And it doesn't help that so many of
the investigations into these allegations get bogged down and buried.
It's you know, like the Steel dossier for example. This
stuff just creates more questions than answers. But what's the
Russia Russia Russia hoax? Right? Well, it's it's the idea

(01:05:29):
that it's the idea of the years before the current
administration entered its second term, operators in Russia somehow compromised
high level US political figures. But the pickle of it
is the badger in the bag is how do we
prove that? What's our smoking gun?

Speaker 1 (01:05:49):
You know?

Speaker 4 (01:05:50):
And look right now. Even though these compromat cyber war
technologies are very good and the patterns and tactics are
quite sophisticated, they're probably not going to come for you
yet because it's going to take a couple more leaps
and big data and machine learning and data brokers to

(01:06:11):
create a system pallunteer esque where they can gather up
tons of information about the public and other countries. Once
that happens, it's easier than ever before for these operators,
these actors to build an influenced profile of you, you know,
like an advertising persona what is max freight train? Williams like?

(01:06:33):
How can we push freight train to agree with pro
Russian things? How can we nudge them?

Speaker 3 (01:06:40):
We're talking about palunteer levels of scaling this kind of
thing where the typical historical versions of this would be
exclusively pointed at high level targets. But if you scaled
it and pointed at a lot of low level or
mid level or even just everyday average targets. Taken as
a whole, it would be just as effective and powerful
and and sing events as messing with the high level ones.

Speaker 4 (01:07:03):
Just so and well put, now it becomes a question
of interest, appetite, and resources. So we don't want to
alarm anybody, and thank you for tuning in on Netflix
or your podcast platform of choice, but we do want
you to be aware. You should be careful when you're
poking the bear right because the eye of souron could

(01:07:23):
turn on you now more easily than ever before.

Speaker 2 (01:07:27):
What are we doing? What's going on?

Speaker 3 (01:07:29):
That's the question, man, That is the question.

Speaker 4 (01:07:32):
When my family started a frozen food empire, I said,
I'm going to be on TV. So, oh, you scamp guys.
I know we're running long, but if it's okay, I
think there's something our fellow conspiracy realists need to understand.
It doesn't get brought up often when we talk about

(01:07:55):
super weapons on the Russian side, but super weapons include biowarfare,
and we're going to bracket Wuhan Right, We're going to
bracket plandemic conspiracies just for a second, because we do
have to acknowledge that Russia has been getting some bad
press recently about two years ago for resurrecting the forty

(01:08:22):
eighth Central Scientific Research Institute, which is, by the way,
one of their spoopiest, dupiest biological warfare labs from the
days of the Cold War.

Speaker 2 (01:08:36):
Oh dear, yeah, I wonder if they're going to develop
COVID twenty six just like the US. Oh, I mean
NISI I mean uh never.

Speaker 4 (01:08:48):
Sorry, guys, there's a lot of pollen in the air
bat populations, population.

Speaker 3 (01:08:56):
Are you guys?

Speaker 4 (01:08:56):
Okay?

Speaker 2 (01:08:57):
What's happening?

Speaker 4 (01:08:59):
Marcus got what? Markets got wet? So by now, it's
no secret that both the USSR and the US went
very deep into extremely dangerous bioweapon research. And the thing is,
of all the bioweaponry programs that we can prove to
have existed, proved not suspect the ones we know definitely happened,

(01:09:23):
there was only one that was able to weaponize a
pandemic capable virus. It is the Soviet bioweapons program that
was originally established way back in nineteen twenty eight. And
I think most of us assume that despite agreements, this
bioweapon research never really stopped in the US and Russia.

(01:09:46):
In China, Russia denies these allegations. And here's the thing,
and they said, yeah, they were speaking in public statements.
After the Washington Post exposed this to the West, the
head of the site said, of course we're building new stuff.
Of course we're back in production. But guys, what we're

(01:10:06):
doing is defensive research. We're trying to figure out how
to protect the Russian military and the Russian public from
biological attacks. And indeed, the Russian invasion of Ukraine, one
of the reasons they gave for it was they said
there was an imminent attack, a bioweapon attack from Ukraine

(01:10:27):
on the way to Russia.

Speaker 2 (01:10:28):
Doesn't that sound a little familiar to the reasoning behind
gain of function research in the United States and the
scientific establishment across the world. We need to protect ourselves,
so let us make the most virulent version of all
of the world's worst viruses possible.

Speaker 4 (01:10:48):
Yeah, to stop buildings in America from burning, we need
to make a secret place where we build better fires.
That's the thing, because research how to stop by a warfare,
if you're good at researching how to stop it, it
gets really close to researching how to cause it, you

(01:11:09):
know what I mean.

Speaker 2 (01:11:10):
It's because you have to know what you're gonna fight
ten years from now.

Speaker 4 (01:11:14):
Right, build a better fire to protect us from fires?
I mean, look, did you have it? Folks? Thank you
for tuning in. Does Russia have super weapons? Yes, and
we're going to learn more about these projects as time
goes on, hopefully in enough time to prevent them from
creating a disaster in the field. But we also have

(01:11:34):
to remember, despite all the speculation, despite all the breathless headlines,
Russia already has the world's most dangerous known super weapon.
They have nukes. They have a lot of them. Do
they work? That's an open question, and for now that's
the stuff Russia doesn't want you to know.

Speaker 2 (01:11:54):
Only one really has to work, right.

Speaker 4 (01:11:56):
That's the thing. It's not the ten that don't, it's
the one man. Well, folks, we have big Friday energy.
We can't wait to hear your thoughts. Super weapons? Are
they real? How do we define them? What kind of
stuff do you think these world governments are building in secret?
Let us know. You can find us on the lines.

(01:12:17):
You can call us on a phone, You can always
send us an email.

Speaker 3 (01:12:20):
That's right, you can find us at the handle Conspiracy
stuff or conspiracy stuff show on your social media platform
of choice, depending what else we got.

Speaker 2 (01:12:28):
We have a phone number. It's one eight three three
std WYTK. When you call in, tell us who you
think the head of the Russian compermount system is. You know,
in the US and Israel we had Epstein. Who is
the Russian version of that? Hmm? Let us know what
you think when you call, and give yourself a cool nickname,
and let us know if we can use your name

(01:12:48):
and message on the air. If you want to send
us an email, you can do that too.

Speaker 4 (01:12:51):
We are the entities to read each piece of correspondence
we receive. Be well aware, yet to unafraid. Sometimes the
void rides back. One of my favorite authors in the
entirety of canon is Vladimir Nabokov. So please don't think
we're angry at Russia.

Speaker 3 (01:13:09):
Overall.

Speaker 4 (01:13:10):
We'll see out here in the dark conspiracy at iHeartRadio
dot com.

Speaker 2 (01:13:32):
Stuff they don't want you to know. Is a production
of iHeartRadio. For more podcasts from iHeartRadio, visit the iHeartRadio app,
Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to your favorite shows.