Russia Bolsters Defense with Nuclear-Resistant Bomb Shelters Amid Escalating Global Tension

[Social Media]

 

As fears of a potential World War III grow, Russia has begun mass-producing mobile bomb shelters capable of withstanding nuclear blasts. These shelters, dubbed “KUB-M,” are designed to provide protection against a variety of threats, including nuclear radiation, natural disasters, and conventional weaponry. The announcement coincides with increasing global tension and fresh accusations from Moscow directed at U.S. President Joe Biden, claiming his actions risk escalating into a worldwide conflict.

Russia has started mass-producing mobile bomb shelters capable of withstanding nuclear weapons. https://t.co/GNuiRFd5xZ pic.twitter.com/09kJrHmWZw

— New York Post (@nypost) November 19, 2024

 

According to Russia’s emergency ministry research institute, the KUB-M shelters can sustain up to 48 hours of protection against radiation following a nuclear detonation. They are engineered to accommodate up to 54 people and are reinforced to shield against explosions, shrapnel, collapsing structures, hazardous chemicals, and fires. The design emphasizes flexibility and durability, enabling the shelters to be transported easily by truck and endure Russia’s challenging northern permafrost conditions.

 

 

Visually resembling shipping containers, each shelter consists of two modules: a primary room for occupants and a technical block. Additional modules can be incorporated as required. “The mobile shelter is a multifunctional structure that provides protection for people from various threats, including natural disasters and man-made accidents,” the institute explained, emphasizing the shelters as “an important step towards improving the safety of citizens.”

 

 

Although no specific justification was provided for the deployment of these advanced safety measures, the timing raises eyebrows. The development follows President Biden’s approval of Ukraine’s use of U.S. long-range missiles against Russian targets, a move that has intensified speculation about a broader conflict. The announcement also comes shortly after Russian President Vladimir Putin approved a revised nuclear doctrine that effectively lowers the threshold for the use of nuclear weapons, further fueling international apprehension.

 

As geopolitical tensions escalate, the research institute reiterated the shelters’ critical role. “This initiative underscores our commitment to protecting lives in the face of both natural and man-made threats,” the organization stated, presenting the project as a proactive measure in a world fraught with uncertainty. While the new doctrine and advanced safety measures may be seen as steps toward readiness, they also highlight the growing anxiety about global security in the current geopolitical climate.

 

Based on a report by NYP 2024-11-21

 

 

 

[Snackbar]

Russian bomb shelter order online B20.00

[pattayasan]

I suppose they must be well insulated. What about the million degrees celsius?

[thaibeachlovers]

8 minutes ago, pattayasan said:

I suppose they must be well insulated. What about the million degrees celsius?

You should ask all the Americans that bought nuclear bomb shelters back in the 50s and 60s.

[pattayasan]

1 minute ago, thaibeachlovers said:

You should ask all the Americans that bought nuclear bomb shelters back in the 50s and 60s.

 

They were just as stupid as well.

[dinsdale]

Escalating Global Tension

Thanks lame duck Joe. The nuke bit is just bluster (hopefully) but what isn't is Biden's move which has now been joined by the UK and their Storm Shadow being fired into Russia. It means a lot more deaths in Ukraine. Kiev along with other regions in Ukraine will be hit and hit hard whilst the ATACMS and Storm Shadow's impact whilst causing death and damage won't overall be effective in bringing and end to the war. Just the opposite.

[nobodysfriend]

 

Ridicolous .

No place for living in .

Only for dying inside .

 

[john donson]

thank god the elite bought their mega villa's with bomb shelters far away in safety, right?

[Emdog]

So what if maybe survive the blast. What do you do then? Step outside and die in a few days or somehow stay inside and die over months from radiation. If I had to choose, I think I'd go with the quick death: pain only hurts if you are alive and aware to feel it.

Those who call missiles to hit inside Russia as some sort of escalation are absurd. What do you think Putin has been doing for most of the war? Hitting inside Ukraine. Tit for tat is just fine. The west believes in treating Russian gentle, but first have to get their attention. Should have been blasting Russia from day one of the illegal invasion

[dinsdale]

 

[dinsdale]

6 minutes ago, Emdog said:

So what if maybe survive the blast. What do you do then? Step outside and die in a few days or somehow stay inside and die over months from radiation. If I had to choose, I think I'd go with the quick death: pain only hurts if you are alive and aware to feel it.

Those who call missiles to hit inside Russia as some sort of escalation are absurd. What do you think Putin has been doing for most of the war? Hitting inside Ukraine. Tit for tat is just fine. The west believes in treating Russian gentle, but first have to get their attention. Should have been blasting Russia from day one of the illegal invasion

It is an escalation. Putin will react to this no doubt about it. How he'll react is not with nukes but IMO massive missile and drone attacks on military, dual use and civilian targets. The guys a madman but not mad enough to deploy a tactical nuke. 

[RuamRudy]

5 hours ago, nobodysfriend said:

 

Ridicolous .

No place for living in .

Only for dying inside .

 

 

But probably very expensive to build (well, the spec will suggest expensive at least) so someone will be very happy to build and supply as many as they can get away with before the cracks appear in the welding and the hinges break off the doors etc. 

[billd766]

9 hours ago, dinsdale said:

Escalating Global Tension

Thanks lame duck Joe. The nuke bit is just bluster (hopefully) but what isn't is Biden's move which has now been joined by the UK and their Storm Shadow being fired into Russia. It means a lot more deaths in Ukraine. Kiev along with other regions in Ukraine will be hit and hit hard whilst the ATACMS and Storm Shadow's impact whilst causing death and damage won't overall be effective in bringing and end to the war. Just the opposite.

Yet you fail to mention that in your opinion it is OK for Russia to use long range missiles from their own arsenal and also those of Iran and N Korea to attack the Ukraine. Or doesn't that matter to you?

[dinsdale]

1 hour ago, billd766 said:

Yet you fail to mention that in your opinion it is OK for Russia to use long range missiles from their own arsenal and also those of Iran and N Korea to attack the Ukraine. Or doesn't that matter to you?

Of course it's not ok. What a stupid thing to say. My post was in relation to the escalating situation. I actually said that the deployment of these weapons will end up with more Ukrainians dying. Do you honestly think I think this is OK and that somehow my post is supporting this inevitable retaliation from Putin? 100,000s of thousands of lives lost for something that could have and should have been stopped before it started. I find what you accuse me of as totally despicable. 

[candide]

1 hour ago, dinsdale said:

Of course it's not ok. What a stupid thing to say. My post was in relation to the escalating situation. I actually said that the deployment of these weapons will end up with more Ukrainians dying. Do you honestly think I think this is OK and that somehow my post is supporting this inevitable retaliation from Putin? 100,000s of thousands of lives lost for something that could have and should have been stopped before it started. I find what you accuse me of as totally despicable. 

Russia has already escalated and there is not much left for him to escalate. On top of it, Russia's weapon stock is not infinite.

 

The other aspect is that Putin won't escalate enough to spoil his chances to get an advantageous peace agreement from Trump.

 

Having said that, you are right that it should have been stopped in 2014, before Russia had enough time to prepare for a full invasion. But Obama and other Western governments completely underestimated the Russian threat at that time.

Edited November 21 by candide

[billd766]

1 hour ago, dinsdale said:

Of course it's not ok. What a stupid thing to say. My post was in relation to the escalating situation. I actually said that the deployment of these weapons will end up with more Ukrainians dying. Do you honestly think I think this is OK and that somehow my post is supporting this inevitable retaliation from Putin? 100,000s of thousands of lives lost for something that could have and should have been stopped before it started. I find what you accuse me of as totally despicable. 

And once again you fail to mention the invading country that started the whole thing off. That was Russia by the way.

 

Answer me a simple question.

 

How many of the multiple deaths would have been avoided and how much collateral damage would not have been done, if Putin had decided NOT to invade a sovereign country?

[dinsdale]

56 minutes ago, candide said:

Russia has already escalated and there is not much left for him to escalate. On top of it, Russia's weapon stock is not infinite.

 

The other aspect is that Putin won't escalate enough to spoil his chances to get an advantageous peace agreement from Trump.

 

Having said that, you are right that it should have been stopped in 2014, before Russia had enough time to prepare for a full invasion. But Obama and other Western governments completely underestimated the Russian threat at that time.

You're right about Russia's weapon stock not being infinite but it's a lot more than what Ukraine have. The drip feeding of weapons to Ukraine has not helped. As for the ATACMS and Storm Shadow's what Ukraine really needs is more air defence systems. News is coming through that Russia has launched an ICBM possibly an RS-26 which is nuclear capable into Dnipro. Someone posted earlier either on this thread or another that's there's no escalation. You can make your own mind up about that. I said Putin will retaliate big and that's going to happen. If an ICBM was launched this is Putin chest beating but it is concerning. 

Edited November 21 by dinsdale

[dinsdale]

31 minutes ago, billd766 said:

And once again you fail to mention the invading country that started the whole thing off. That was Russia by the way.

 

Answer me a simple question.

 

How many of the multiple deaths would have been avoided and how much collateral damage would not have been done, if Putin had decided NOT to invade a sovereign country?

You seem to be off on a tangent. What I've been talking about is the current situation. No point saying "if Putin had decided NOT to invade a sovereign country?" because he has. More to the point is why was he able to. Putin is fkd but so are those that let this happen. The US knew well in advance what was going on. In fact the whole world could see what was going to happen with the massive build up of troops. I've posted previously that 100,000s of lives could have been spared if this was stopped before it started. Seems you've missed this bit of my posts or have chosen to ignore it. 

Edited November 21 by dinsdale

[candide]

6 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

You're right about Russia's weapon stock not being infinite but it's a lot more than what Ukraine have. The drip feeding of weapons to Ukraine has not helped. As for the ATACMS and Storm Shadow's what Ukraine really needs is more air defence systems. News is coming through the Russia has launched an ICBM possibly an RS-26 which is nuclear capable. Someone posted earlier either on this thread or another that's there's no escalation. You can make your own mind up about that. I said Putin will retaliate big and that's going to happen. If an ICBM was launched this is Putin chest beating but it is concerning. 

Putin will not spoil his chances to get an advantageous deal from Trump. If he does something horrible, Trump will not be able to support him. The most viable strategy for Putin is to play the good guy who wants peace, while trying to conquer as much land as possible on the battlefield.

[dinsdale]

2 minutes ago, candide said:

Putin will not spoil his chances to get an advantageous deal from Trump. If he does something horrible, Trump will not be able to support him. The most viable strategy for Putin is to play the good guy who wants peace, while trying to conquer as much land as possible on the battlefield.

Agree and the fact is he will not deploy a nuke. I have, however, said he will retaliate for missiles coming into Russia and yes, I am well aware as is everyone that Putin has been doing this from day one. Doesn't detract from the fact that Kiev and other regions are preparing for a massive (not nuclear) hit from Putin. Biden's actions are reckless to say the least. Winter is coming and the fighting would have slowed down as it has previously. Biden has escalated the situation.

[candide]

7 minutes ago, dinsdale said:

Agree and the fact is he will not deploy a nuke. I have, however, said he will retaliate for missiles coming into Russia and yes, I am well aware as is everyone that Putin has been doing this from day one. Doesn't detract from the fact that Kiev and other regions are preparing for a massive (not nuclear) hit from Putin. Biden's actions are reckless to say the least. Winter is coming and the fighting would have slowed down as it has previously. Biden has escalated the situation.

Well, It's the Ukrainian who asked him, so It's their choice if they think It's better for them.

[dinsdale]

26 minutes ago, candide said:

Well, It's the Ukrainian who asked him, so It's their choice if they think It's better for them.

This is an interesting point you make. Why would Zelnzky be requesting this so close to Trump coming in? Is there a tactical reason? Why only Kursk? Possibly it's to help pull the troops out of there before the onset of winter and the possibility of their supply lines being cut off or more likely help to secure Kursk for negotiations? Who knows but lobbing some ATACMS and Storm Shadows into the area sure ain't going lead to any victory. 

Edited November 21 by dinsdale

[dinsdale]

ICBM has been launched into Dnipro. Seems to have evaded air defense. No details on warhead if it actually had one but obviously not a nuke.

[candide]

1 hour ago, dinsdale said:

This is an interesting point you make. Why would Zelnzky be requesting this so close to Trump coming in? Is there a tactical reason? Why only Kursk? Possibly it's to help pull the troops out of there before the onset of winter and the possibility of their supply lines being cut off or more likely help to secure Kursk for negotiations? Who knows but lobbing some ATACMS and Storm Shadows into the area sure ain't going lead to any victory. 

For both sides, it's likely about improving their negotiation position by holding or conquering as much land as possible, and weakening the enemy.

It's also not guaranteed that negotiations will succeed.

[Tropicalevo]

19 hours ago, dinsdale said:

Of course it's not ok. What a stupid thing to say. My post was in relation to the escalating situation.

Only one country is escalating things.

The others are responding.

The west has not threatened Putin with nuclear weapons.

Putin has been threatening to use them for a while. (I have forgotten how many times, it seems like every other day.)