NEW YORK (AP) — North Korea's foreign minister said Saturday in an interview with The Associated Press that his country is ready to halt its nuclear tests if the United States suspends its annual military exercises with South Korea.

He also defended the country's right to maintain a nuclear deterrent and warned that North Korea won't be cowed by international sanctions. And for those waiting for the North's regime to collapse, he had this to say: Don't hold your breath.

Foreign Minister Ri Su Yong, in his first interview with a Western news organization, held firm to Pyongyang's longstanding position that the U.S. drove his country to develop nuclear weapons as an act of self-defense. At the same time, he suggested that suspending the military exercises with Seoul could open the door to talks and reduced tensions.

"If we continue on this path of confrontation, this will lead to very catastrophic results, not only for the two countries but for the whole entire world as well," he said, speaking in Korean through an interpreter. "It is really crucial for the United States government to withdraw its hostile policy against the DPRK and as an expression of this stop the military exercises, war exercises, in the Korean Peninsula. Then we will respond likewise." He used the acronym for North Korea's official name, the Democratic People's Republic of Korea.

Ri, who spoke calmly and in measured words, a contrast to the often bombastic verbiage used by the North'smedia, claimed the North's proposal was "very logical."

"Stop the nuclear war exercises in the Korean Peninsula, then we should also cease our nuclear tests," he said, during the interview, conducted in the country's diplomatic mission to the United Nations. He spoke beneath portraits of Kim Il Sung and Kim Jung Il, North Korea's two previous leaders — the grandfather and father of current leader Kim Jong Un.

If the exercises are halted "for some period, for some years," he added, "new opportunities may arise for the two countries and for the whole entire world as well."

It is extremely rare for top North Korean officials to give interviews to foreign media, and particularly with Western news organizations.

Ri's proposal, which he said he hoped U.S. policymakers would heed, may well fall on deaf ears. North Korea, which sees the U.S.-South Korean exercises as a rehearsal for invasion, has floated similar proposals to Washington in the past but the U.S. has insisted the North give up its nuclear weapons program first before any negotiations. The result has been a stalemate between the two countries that Ri said has put the peninsula at the crossroads of a thermonuclear war.

In an initial response to Ri's remarks, a U.S. official defended the military exercises as demonstrating the U.S. commitment to its alliance with the South and said they enhance the combat readiness, flexibility and capabilities of the alliance.

"We call again on North Korea to refrain from actions and rhetoric that further raise tensions in the region and focus instead on taking concrete steps toward fulfilling its international commitments and obligations," said the official, who requested anonymity because he said he was not authorized to speak publicly on the matter.

Sanctions, Ri said, won't sway the North.

"If they believe they can actually frustrate us with sanctions, they are totally mistaken," he said. "The more pressure you put on to something, the more emotionally you react to stand up against it. And this is important for the American policymakers to be aware of."

Ri, in New York to attend a United Nations' meeting on sustainable development, said the possibility of conflict has increased significantly this year because the exercises have taken on what Pyongyang sees as a more aggressive and threatening tone — including training to conduct precision "decapitation" strikes on North Korea'sleadership.

This year's exercises are the biggest ever, involving about 300,000 troops. Washington and Seoul say they beefed up the maneuvers after North Korea conducted its fifth nuclear test, in January, which also brought a new round of tough sanctions by the U.N. down on Pyongyang's head. The exercises are set to continue through the end of the month.

Pyongyang, meanwhile, has responded with a series of missile launches and statements in its media that the country has developed its long-range ballistic missile and nuclear warhead technologies to the point that they now present a credible deterrent and could even be used against targets on the U.S. mainland, though not all foreign analysts accept that claim.

Ri's comments to the AP came just hours after North Korea launched what was believed to be a submarine-launched ballistic missile in its latest show of defiance as the U.S.-South Korea exercises wind down.

Ri also used his presence at the U.N. conference as a forum to denounce Washington, saying in a brief statement that while North Korea is contributing to the objectives of global sustainable development by taking measures to double its production of grains to solve its food problem by 2030 and by reforesting 1.67 million hectares (4.13 million acres) of mountainous areas, it is doing so under "the most adverse conditions due to outside forces."

In the interview, he stated that the United States has used its power to get other countries to join in pressure on North Korea.

"A country as small as the DPRK cannot actually be a threat to the U.S. or to the world," he told the AP. "How great would it be if the world were to say to the United States and the American government not to conduct any more military exercises in the Korean Peninsula ... But there is not a single country that says this to the U.S."

"These big countries alone or together are telling us that we should calm down," he said. "For us this is like a sentence, that we should accept our death and refuse our right to sovereignty."

Ri said North Korea is not encouraged by the thawing of relations between Washington and Cuba or Iran.

"We're happy for the Cuban people and the Iranian people that they have reached successes on their path to pursuing their own goals and interests," he said. But he added that those cases "differ totally" from the U.S.-North Korea relationship.

Join the conversation about this story »

From Patrick Henry's "Give me liberty, or give me death" to FDR's "the only thing we have to fear is fear itself," we have selected nine of our favorite speeches that have changed the world:

SEE ALSO: 'Do not fear failure': The best pieces of life advice from General George S. Patton

Napoleon Bonaparte — "Farewell to the Old Guard"

After suffering several setbacks in the Napoleonic Wars, Napoleon was forced to abdicate his throne on April 6, 1814.

At the time of the abdication, he gave a speech praising his faithful soldiers and generals who had stuck by him:

Soldiers of my Old Guard: I bid you farewell. For twenty years I have constantly accompanied you on the road to honor and glory.

In these latter times, as in the days of our prosperity, you have invariably been models of courage and fidelity.

With men such as you our cause could not be lost; but the war would have been interminable; it would have been civil war, and that would have entailed deeper misfortunes on France.

I have sacrificed all of my interests to those of the country. 

Source: Speeches That Changed The World

Georges Jacques Danton — “Dare, Dare Again, Always Dare”

Given during the tumult of the French Revolution, Danton urged his fellow French citizens to mobilize in order to push back the invading Prussian forces.

The speech was inspiring, but also chilling, as Danton pushed for those not supporting the war efforts to be put to death: 

 At such a moment this National Assembly becomes a veritable committee of war. We ask that you concur with us in directing this sublime movement of the people, by naming commissioners who will second us in these great measures.

We ask that any one refusing to give personal service or to furnish arms shall be punished with death. We ask that a set of instructions be drawn up for the citizens to direct their movements.

We ask that couriers be sent to all the departments to notify them of the decrees that you proclaim here. The tocsin we are about to ring is not an alarm signal; it sounds the charge on the enemies of our country.

To conquer them we must dare, dare again, always dare, and France is saved!

Source: Speeches That Changed The World

Giuseppe Garibaldi — Speech to his Soldiers

In the mid 19th century, Giuseppe Garibaldi led a military movement to liberate the various Italian kingdoms from Austrian rule and create a unified modern nation of Italy.

Garibaldi gave this speech in 1860 to rally his troops for further action to unify the nation: 

To arms, then, all of you! all of you! And the oppressors and the mighty shall disappear like dust.

You, too, women, cast away all the cowards from your embraces; they will give you only cowards for children, and you who are the daughters of the land of beauty must bear children who are noble and brave.

Let timid doctrinaires depart from among us to carry their servility and their miserable fears elsewhere. This people is its own master.

It wishes to be the brother of other peoples, but to look on the insolent with a proud glance, not to grovel before them imploring its own freedom.

It will no longer follow in the trail of men whose hearts are foul. No! No! No!

Source: Speeches That Changed The World

Vladimir Putin certainly has a remarkable ability to woo American presidents and presidential aspirants. The budding bromance between the Russian strongman and Donald Trump is only the latest example. George W. Bush famously looked into his eyes and took stock, favorably, of Putin's soul back in the early days of their respective presidencies.

Now, in the already-famous Jeffrey Goldberg article in The Atlantic, President Obama is portrayed as almost friendly to the leader of the Kremlin, despite what has happened from Crimea to eastern Ukraine to Syria in recent years—and despite what has happened within Russia itself. Remarkably, Obama describes Putin as consistently "polite" in their conversations.

Furthermore, Obama seems to sympathize with Putin's efforts to retain some influence and prestige for a declining power. Through this prism, Putin's behavior is best understood almost as a form of insecurity rather than aggressiveness. 

This perspective helps explain Obama's restraint in addressing the Ukraine issue and in reacting to Russia's role in Syria. The United States has not provided any notable lethal aid to the Ukrainian military in response to Russian aggression, has not ostracized Russia diplomatically (quite the opposite, in fact, particularly in regard to Syria lately), and has wielded even the economic sanctions tool with considerable restraint.

To my mind, there is virtue in much of Obama's approach. Turning the dispute over Ukraine into a more militarized proxy conflict by providing substantial lethal assistance to Ukraine's armed forces, for example, would likely only produce stronger Russian reactions and escalation, unintentionally but inexorably punishing the people of Ukraine along the way. 

Thug life

That said, President Obama's interpretation of Putin—and thus his case for showing restraint—does not hold water. More than an intellectual mistake, it is entirely unsustainable in American politics; there is no way the next president will maintain such a view.

Even Trump would almost surely see his bromance with Putin fall apart (just like Trump's relationship with Senator Ted Cruz deteriorated dramatically in recent months), since the Ukraine problem and other matters are unlikely to solve themselves and Putin is unlikely to take the initiative to solve them in good faith.

A more plausible interpretation of the Russian autocrat, of course, goes more like this: Putin is not genuinely polite. He is a thug who is cleverly duping Obama, like he duped Bush before him. He is smart enough to use conversation and superficial friendliness to soothe American leaders even as he acts in aggressive ways around the world.

"Polite" is an unconvincing word to use for a leader who has imprisoned or otherwise muzzled most domestic opposition, seized not only part of Ukraine but, before that, chunks of Georgia, and used electoral shenanigans to turn himself into nearly a lifetime president. Then there is the provocative military behavior against NATO nations, neutral countries—and even the United States, with two Russian Su-24 planes buzzing the American guided missile destroyer Donald Cook earlier this month. 

Nor should Putin be seen as simply struggling to hang out to some remnant of Russian greatness. He is far more assertive and arrogant than that. He considers Russia one of the world's three or four great powers and is trying to maximize its influence, especially in the near abroad and among former or current client states.

He is also showing assertiveness in the Arctic and wherever else he can. One of his stated goals in doing so is to reassert Russian prerogatives and greatness; another is to check America and its sanctimonious Western democratic allies.

The Russian people may not be as ruthless as Putin, but he plays upon their feelings of embarrassment and embitterment resulting from the end of the Cold War and its aftermath, when Russia was weak and when NATO expanded up to its very borders.

The future of European security

There is still a powerful case for restraint in dealing with Russia, especially in regard to central Europe. There is some hope for the Minsk II process over Ukraine, with a semi-ceasefire holding. The next American president should work within its parameters, if possible, rather than up the military ante in the conflict. But the odds are against such restraint at present, given that few share Obama's benign interpretation of Putin and what drives him.

We should also have a debate about an alternative eastern European security architecture that would create a zone of genuinely neutral states from Finland and Sweden down through Ukraine and Belarus and Moldova to Georgia. This would not be appeasement of Moscow.

For it to work, Russia would have to verifiably pull out of the places in eastern Ukraine and northern Georgia where it is currently ensconced. And it would have to allow these countries access to whatever economic arrangements they chose over time—the decision not to consider them as potential candidates for NATO would not deprive them of broader economic and diplomatic prerogatives that any modern state is due.

Such a plan should not be considered because Putin is polite or reasonable, but because it is probably the only way to avoid an ongoing action-reaction spiral in U.S.-Russian relations, with even worse consequences still to come. 

The case for working to build a more stable U.S.-Russian relationship in the future is already unpopular enough in American politics—it must not be conflated with a sympathetic or favorable interpretation of the Russian autocrat.

SEE ALSO: US Army general: Next time Russian jets buzz US ships, it may not end well for them

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: This is the Marine Corps' monstrous new assault vehicle

The US has deployed two of its most advanced fighter jets to Romania in order to better keep an eye on Russian activity in the Black Sea, the Air Force Times reports.

The two F-22 Raptors are part of a supporting US force that has been deployed to NATO member Romania. The aircraft are there as part of a mission intended to "bolster the security of NATO allies and partners in Europe,"according to a US Air Force press release.

The F-22, the first truly operational fifth-generation fighter in the world, will be used to further increase interoperability between the US and fellow NATO nations as well as signal to Russia that the US will stand with NATO against any Russian aggression.

"These aircraft have the ability to project air dominance quickly, at great distances, to defeat any possible threat," US Lt. Gen. Timothy Ray said of the F-22 deployment in Romania at a press conference.

The deployment comes soon after Russian military aircraft repeatedly buzzed a US naval ship that was in international waters in the Baltic Sea.

In response to that incident, US Secretary of State John Kerry said that the ship would have been justified in shooting down the Russian aircraft.

The US decision to place the F-22s in Europe also comes on the heels of dire predictions concerning NATO readiness to defend the Baltics in the event of a Russian invasion of the NATO member states.

In February, the think tank RAND published a report estimating that, at current defense levels, Russia would be able to occupy the Baltics in just two days.

The F-22 deployment is not the only indication of US concern over a Russian drive to become a global power. In response to concerns that Russia has increased its submarine activity to Cold War levels, the US is will reopen a submarine-hunting base in Iceland because of Russia's increase naval activity in the North Atlantic.

SEE ALSO: This is what Russian aggression in the Baltic Sea looks like

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: The US is showing its strength against Russia by sending its most advanced warplanes to the Black Sea

Earlier this month, Iran unveiled a new main battle tank, the Tiam, that appears to be a mashup of Chinese and US tanks from the 1960s, The Diplomat reports.

The tank appears to have the main hull and engine of the US' M47M Patton, a variation of the M47 Patton made in the early 1960s, and the turret of China's type 59/69 tank, first produced in 1958.

The Tiam sports a 105mm rifled main cannon, slightly underpowered when compared to the 120mm cannons found on US and German tanks, or the 125mm cannons found on newer Russian tanks.

When the tank was unveiled in a public ceremony on April 13, it came out partially covered in explosive reactive armor bricks, and spewing thick black smoke from it's engine, which was designed more than half a century ago.

The tank appears to have no radar or active defense modules, the trend now in ground combat vehicles.

The roll out on the 13th included a few other Iranian-built vehicles, including a self-propelled 57 mm air defence system called the Bahman, and a nuclear, biological, and chemical detection (NBC) vehicle called the Shahram, IHS Janes reports.

Another Iranian tank, the Karrar, which Iranian Brig. Gen. Hossein Dehghan says is "100% Iranian made and it can even be superior than T-90 in some degrees," according to Iran's Mehr News Agency.

Meanwhile, Russia is on track to offer the Armata series of tanks and armored vehicles, and there are plenty of other options on the market, so Iran's Tiam tank seems to have dubious prospects as an export.

SEE ALSO: The Marine Corps' M1A1 Abrams tank could get a whole lot tougher

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: What this Navy SEAL's '40% rule' can teach you about success

The US military conducted "freedom of navigation" operations against 13 countries last year, including several in dispute of China's claims in the South and East China seas, according to an annual Pentagon report released on Monday.

The operations were against China, India, Indonesia, Iran, Libya, Malaysia, the Maldives, Oman, the Philippines and Vietnam, the report said.

It did not specify how many such operations were conducted against each of those countries. The US military carried out single operations against Taiwan, Nicaragua and Argentina, for a total of 13 countries, the department said in the two-page report.

The freedom of navigation operations involve sending US Navy ships and military aircraft into areas where other countries have tried to limit access. The aim is to demonstrate that the international community does not accept such restrictions.

The US military has repeatedly conducted operations disputing China's maritime claims in recent years and did so again in 2015, a year in which Beijing's island-building activity in the resource-rich areas of the South China Sea led to rising tensions in the region.

A US guided-missile destroyer conducted a freedom of navigation patrol near one of China's man-made islands in the Spratly archipelago in October. US military flights near the islands have been warned to go away.

US Defense Secretary Ash Carter said the Navy would continue to operate in the region despite China's condemnation of the patrols.

Admiral Harry Harris, the head of US Pacific Command, said this year the Navy would step up the freedom of navigation operations in the South China Sea because of concerns China is attempting to assert its dominance by building military facilities there.

US freedom of navigation operations last year also challenged China's claims of jurisdiction in the airspace above its maritime Exclusive Economic Zone as well as restrictions it has tried to impose on aircraft flying through an Air Defense Identification Zone over the East China Sea.

The number of countries the United States challenged last year was down from 2014, when it targeted 19 countries. That was the largest number in more than a decade.

Iran and the Philippines have been the most frequently challenged countries over the years, mainly because they sit astride heavily traveled sea lanes whose use they have tried to limit or govern.

SEE ALSO: Obama will send 250 more military personnel to Syria

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: A Navy SEAL reveals what ‘American Sniper’ got wrong

Want to get behind the stick of the world’s most advanced aircraft? Well, the Air Force now has a traveling Oculus Rift experience that will let you do just that.

SEE ALSO: Iran unveils new main battle tank made from US and Chinese designs from the 1960s

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Watch this beautiful footage of Saab’s brand new fighter jet that aims to compete with the F-16

The latest footage from the Combined Joint Task Force's Operation Inherent Resolve shows the true breadth of the 66-member coalition's air operation against ISIS.

In one video, we see an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) observing ISIS fighters placing an improvised explosive device (IED) near the town of Doudyan, Syria.

The coalition then revealed the location of the IED back to friendly forces on the ground.

Another video shows an ISIS baracks near Al Hawl, Syria being wiped off the map.

SEE ALSO: See the first US Air Force B-52 airstrike against ISIS

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: The US Army is sending Apache attack helicopters to fight ISIS in Iraq

From April 18 to April 22 the US's Joint Task Force-Bravo in Honduras hosted a massive multi-national firefighter training exercise. 

CENTAM SMOKE 2016 hosted 34 firefighters from seven Central American nations and the US. The purpose of the exercise was to better promote regional cooperation while improving collective capabilities, training, and overall firefighting abilities. 

And CENTAM SMOKE has already had beneficial results. On March 30, Joint Task Force-Bravo helped Honduran firefighting forces battle a shifting and wildly spreading wildfire. 

You can see photos from CENTAM SMOKE below.

SEE ALSO: Come along to fire school and see how the military trains elite firefighters

Firefighters from seven Central American nations participate in live-fire training, one of many exercises the 34 participants experienced during a week-long iteration of CENTAM SMOKE (Sharing Mutual Operational Knowledge and Experience) at Soto Cano Air Base, Honduras, April 20, 2016. The firefighters came from Belize, Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, and Panama.

US Air Force Senior Airman Logan Brouse, 612th Air Base Squadron fire protection specialist, demonstrates the use of a fire hose while training firefighters from Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, Panama and Belize during CENTAM SMOKE.

Honduran firefighter Jorge Betanco and Guatemalan Humanitarian Rescue Unit member Erick Osorio member hand off during a relay race during CENTAM SMOKE.

Grab your notebook and prepare to copy. The first edition of this series, “The CIA operative’s guide to safe travel,” received an overwhelming response and was featured in Entrepreneur, Travel and Leisure, and Business Insider to name a few publications. Welcome to part two of the series. I hope you enjoy it and learn something that will keep you safe from harm’s way. Enjoy, and remain vigilant!

SEE ALSO: John Kerry has spent 95.7 days on a plane as Secretary of State

1. Be proactive, not reactive

Make copies of your passport, medical card, credit cards, and travel itinerary. Give a copy to a friend back home and keep a copy with you. Email any pertinent information to yourself through a web-based email account so you can get it from any hotel or Internet café if needed. Check in with the U.S. embassy when you arrive.

2. Use a “fragile” tag

Bags marked with this sticker are generally put on top of the pile, and end up being among the first to hit the baggage claim conveyor belt. That means you can get out of that human Bingo game and to the taxi line a whole lot quicker. You can buy a variety of different labels like these online.

3. Always use your first name

If you are traveling undercover, maintain your real first name. It’s actually harder for CIA operatives to maintain their cover domestically versus overseas. On the slim chance I bump into someone in Florence who, upon seeing me, yells, “Drew!” the source I’m trying to recruit won’t wonder why he’s been calling me Simon the whole time.

A White House official indicated on Monday that the Obama administration was ready to offer Israel the largest military aid package offered to any country over the course of US history.

Amid a push by a large majority of senators to increase foreign aid to Israel, a White House official told Reuters: “We are prepared to sign an MOU [memorandum of understanding] with Israel that would constitute the largest single pledge of military assistance to any country in US history.”

The official said discussions with Israel were ongoing on a memorandum of understanding that would increase US military aid to Israel for the next 10 years, due to be renewed before 2018.

More than 80 of the 100 sitting US senators signed a letter Monday calling on President Barack Obama to increase aid to Israel and immediately sign an agreement on a new defense package. Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders is not one of the 83 signatories.

“In light of Israel’s dramatically rising defense challenges, we stand ready to support a substantially enhanced new long-term agreement to help provide Israel the resources it requires to defend itself and preserve its qualitative military edge,” said the letter, which was seen by Reuters.

Republican Lindsey Graham and Democrat Chris Coons were behind the letter, which was signed by 51 Republican and 32 Democratic senators.

Republican presidential candidate Senator Ted Cruz was one of the signatories, while Sanders was not.

Due to expire in 2018, the current aid package stands at $3 billion annually, and, according to reports, Israel wants to up the amount to $5 billion annually. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has hinted he may wait to negotiate with Obama’s successor to try and secure a better deal.

Israel welcomed the reports but did not comment on the status of talks over the deal.

Speaking to The Times of Israel last month, chairman of the Senate’s Subcommittee on State, Foreign Operations and Related Programs Lindsey Graham vowed to “do everything I can to squeeze some money out of a tight budget to help increase funding for Israel.”

“Israel has to decide what to do and when to do it. But I can say this: we’ll have more money this year than potentially next year, because sequestration kicks back in,” he explained, referring to spending cuts the US federal government enacted in 2013.

During a visit to Israel last month, US Vice President Joe Biden reportedly warned Netanyahu that the aid package will be less than what Jerusalem seeks, but offered reassurances the amount would reflect the security needs of the country.

During Biden’s meeting with Netanyahu, described by an Israeli official as “friendly, cordial and warm,” the vice president urged the prime minister to accept the offer, assuring him the agreement could always be amended at a later date.

“In the past we’ve known how to make adjustments to agreements after they’ve been signed,” he said according to Channel 10, which cited senior Israeli officials.

The Prime Minister’s Office could not confirm the content of the report.

In November, Israel was said to have completed its “shopping list” of desired American military materiel, which reportedly included a request for V-22 Ospreys, planes believed capable of reaching Iran.

Israel also reportedly sought the V-22s from the US in 2012 when contemplating a strike on Iran’s Fordo enrichment facility, but later decided not to purchase due to budgetary restraints.

Under a separate budgetary hierarchy, the US administration is understood to be well-disposed to ensure funding for Israel’s missile defense systems — maintaining and improving the Iron Dome (short-range missile interceptor) and the Arrow (long range) systems, and deploying David’s Sling (medium range), to ensure Israel can counter threats from neighboring Gaza, south Lebanon and Syria, as well as from an Iran that is relentlessly developing its ballistic missile systems.

The US has either jointly developed or financed all three of the programs

SEE ALSO: The CIA operative’s guide to safe travel

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: The US Army is sending Apache attack helicopters to fight ISIS in Iraq

House Armed Services Committee chairman Rep. Mac Thornberry drafted a bill that would stop the Air Force from using funds in their 2017 budget to retire or reduce the use of the A-10 Warthog until the Pentagon's weapons tester completes comparative tests between the A-10 and the F-35 Lightning II.

The tests would compare the two aircraft's ability to conduct close air support, search and rescue missions, and forward air controller airborne missions DefenseNews reports.

Lawmakers in both the House and Senate Armed Services Committee contend that the F-35 doesn't possess the capabilities of the A-10, and that removing the Warthog from service would create a notable capability gap, which would be felt by the soldiers on the ground.

In March of 2015, when Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Mark Welsh's claimed that F-16s and F-15s would take over the role of the A-10,  Senator John McCain unleashed the following scathing criticism:

"It’s really embarrassing to hear you say something like that when I talk to the people who are doing the flying, who are doing the combat who say that the A-10 is by far the best close-air support system we have."

Indeed the A-10, a Cold War-era legacy plane has gained itself a cult following with forward deployed troops in heavy combat zones.

The distinctive buzzing noise made by the Warthog's 30 mm GAU-8/A Avenger has come to signal salvation to soldiers in need of close air support.

"Cutting back a one-of-a-kind capability with no clear replacement is an example of a budget-based strategy, not the strategy-based budget we need to meet our defense needs," a letter from the legislators stated last year.

SEE ALSO: An RAF officer just opened up about one of the biggest problems with NATO

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: The US is showing its strength against Russia by sending its most advanced warplanes to the Black Sea

This post from Igor Markov, an EECS professor at Michgan, originally appeared on Quora as an answer to the question "Overall, who had the stronger military during the Cold War, the US or USSR? Or did it fluctuate throughout?"

It fluctuated throughout, as technology changed many times over, and the economic fortunes of the USSR became very sensitive to oil prices.

As of 1945 (before the Cold War), the USSR had the strongest conventional land-based military and, after the US withdrew most of its troops, essentially dominated in Europe (the US returned some of the troops, but the USSR still held vast numerical advantage, especially in tanks).

The US had the strongest Navy and dominated both the Pacific and the Atlantic uncontested; this didn't change throughout the Cold War, even though naval technologies changed a lot (nuclear subs, etc), and the USSR invested heavily in surface and submarine navies.

The airforces were more or less evenly matched in 1945, except that the US and the UK had better air defense networks. In subsequent years, the USSR developed very competitive air defense equipment and networks.

Other airforce technologies also made major leaps forward, but the USSR eventually lagged behind due to systemic weakness in digital electronics.

Early nuclear weapons affected the balance in several ways. In addition to its demonstrated use of offensive nuclear weapons, the US developed several categories of defensive nuclear weapons, including area air defense and a strategy to block a possible Soviet armor advance through the Fulda gap using tactical nuclear weapons (such as artillery shells).

As a result, the stronger Soviet ground forces in Europe could not fully realize their potential.

In the 1970s and 1980s, the US developed medium range missiles, antitank weapons, robust ground attack planes (A-10) and attack helicopters to neutralize the Fulda gap threat.

At early and mid stages of the Cold War, the USSR had a larger count of nuclear missiles, but that was partly explained by the perceived unreliability of missiles and warheads.

There were also rumors of the so-called Bomber gap and Missile gap between the US and the USSR, most of which turned out false.

SEE ALSO: An RAF officer just opened up about one of the biggest problems with NATO

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: The US is showing its strength against Russia by sending its most advanced warplanes to the Black Sea

The Russian Ministry of Defense has announced plans that it is seeking to buy five young and healthy dolphins, Russian news sources reported this week.

According to the Russian media company TASS, the defense ministry is willing to pay upward of $25,000 for the dolphins.

Specifically, the Kremlin is looking to buy two females and three males between three and five years of age.

The dolphins must also be between 2.3 meters (7.5 feet) and 2.7 meters (8.9 feet) long.

According to NBC News, Moscow's Utrish Dolphinarium promised to supply the dolphins "with all teeth intact' by August 1.

TASS notes that the Ministry of Defense has not specified the reasons it is looking to purchase the marine mammals.

However, an anonymous Russian military source told Russian media company RIA Novosti that the Kremlin wanted the dolphins to add to the stocks of trained dolphins that Russia had seized from Ukraine in Crimea.

Russia seized control of Ukraine's military-dolphin division in March 2014. The dolphin division was originally created by the Soviet Union, but passed into the control of Ukraine following the union's dissolution.

After the seizure of the dolphins in March 2014, RIA Novosti wrote that the "dolphins are trained to patrol open water and attack or attach buoys to items of military interest, such as mines on the sea floor or combat scuba divers trained to slip past enemy security perimeters, known as frogmen."

Russia's interest in acquiring new dolphins demonstrates the country's efforts to perpetuate its dolphin program.

Ukraine, for its part, has been lobbying Russia to return the dolphins it seized in Crimea, stating that the dolphins did not have a choice of whether they wanted to be part of Russia or Ukraine during the Crimean referendum.

SEE ALSO: The US Navy's combat dolphins are serious military assets

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: There is a life-size chocolate statue of Vladimir Putin — and he's the only one who's allowed to eat it

Videos and photographs emerged on the Internet, showing that the Raptor jets have been active within the famous British Mach Loop Low Flying Area.

Since 12 Raptors are deployed to RAF Lakenheath, there is the opportunity for them to get involved in a variety of training activities in the UK and across the continent.

So far the Raptors presence in Europe had only an episodic profile, now we may speak of an operation which is going to last a bit longer. According to the official information the US stealth jets are going to stay overseas until May.

The video above shows the US 5th generation fighter enter the British Mach Loop LFA for the very first time on Apr. 26. In this video one may also note the aircraft maneuvering at low altitude (followed by an US F-15E Strike Eagle from RAF Lakenheath).

Nonetheless, considering the European Reassurance Initiative and inclusion of the Raptor deployments therein (also plausibly in a form of so-called Rapid Raptor Package), the stealth fighter may become a more common sight in the European theater.

Two F-22s were deployed to Romania on Apr. 25 for a few days in Black Sea area.

SEE ALSO: Congress wants the Air Force to prove the F-35 can take over for the A-10

Join the conversation about this story »

China successfully flight tested its new high-speed maneuvering warhead last week, days after Russia carried out its own hypersonic glider test, according to Pentagon officials.

The test of the developmental DF-ZF hypersonic glide vehicle was monitored after launch Friday atop a ballistic missile fired from the Wuzhai missile launch center in central China, said officials familiar with reports of the test.

The maneuvering glider, traveling at several thousand miles per hour, was tracked by satellites as it flew west along the edge of the atmosphere to an impact area in the western part of the country.

It was the seventh successful flight test of the revolutionary glider, which travels at speeds between 4,000 and 7,000 miles per hour.

US intelligence officials have assessed that China plans to use the glider to deliver nuclear weapons through increasingly sophisticated missile defenses. The DF-ZF also could be used as part of a conventional strategic strike weapon capable of hitting targets around the world within an hour.

Pentagon spokesman Cmdr. Bill Urban declined to comment on the latest DF-ZF flight test. “But we do monitor Chinese military modernization carefully,” Urban said.

Rep. Randy Forbes (R., Va.), chairman of the House Armed Services subcommittee on seapower, said China’s hypersonic missile tests are a concern.

“China’s repeated test of a hypersonic glide vehicle demonstrates Beijing is committed to upending both the conventional military and nuclear balance, with grave implications for the stability of Asia,” Forbes told the Washington Free Beacon.

Adm. Cecil Haney, commander of the US Strategic Command, said Jan. 22 that the new hypersonic glide vehicle is among an array of high-technology missiles and weapons, both nuclear and conventional, being developed and deployed by Beijing.

China “recently conducted its sixth successful test of a hypersonic glide vehicle, and as we saw in September last year, is parading missiles clearly displaying their modernization and capability advancements,” Haney said.

China has kept details about the DF-ZF program secret. In March 2015, a Defense Ministry spokesman confirmed one of the hypersonic missile tests after the test was reported in the Free Beacon. The spokesman said the missile test was not aimed at any country and was done for scientific research.

Earlier DF-ZF tests were carried out Nov. 23, Aug. 19, June 7, and on Jan. 9, 2014, Aug. 7, 2014, and Dec. 2, 2014. During at least one test, the maneuvering glider conducted what a defense official said were “extreme maneuvers” at speeds between Mach 5 and Mach 10.

All the tests were first disclosed by the Free Beacon.

Extensive testing and reported successes are indications the new weapon is nearing initial operating capability, although deployment may be years away.

The congressional US-China Economic and Security Review Commission stated in its most recent annual report that the hypersonic glide vehicle program was “progressing rapidly” and that the new strike weapon could be deployed by 2020.

A powered version also is in development and could be fielded by 2025.

“The very high speeds of these weapons, combined with their maneuverability and ability to travel at lower, radar-evading altitudes, would make them far less vulnerable than existing missiles to current missile defenses,” the commission report said.

Li Bingyan, a researcher at China’s National Security Policy Committee, stated in a defense industry journal article published Jan. 27 that hypersonic weapons offer increased speed of attack. “Only by matching the real-time information with the zero-time firepower can one achieve the operational result of destruction upon detection,” Li stated.

China also is taking steps to strengthen its underground missile silos and facilities to withstand precision strikes by hypersonic missiles, such as those planned under the Pentagon’s Prompt Global Strike program.

The latest Chinese hypersonic glide vehicle test was conducted three days after Russia carried out a flight test of its experimental hypersonic glide vehicle. That glider test involved the launch of an SS-19 ballistic missile fired from a missile base in eastern Russia.

The two tests highlight what many analysts have called a new hypersonic arms race among China, Russia, and the United States. India also is working on hypersonic arms.

As radar, sensors, and missile interceptors used to counter missile threats increase in capability, hypersonic maneuvering missiles are viewed as a technological leap in strike capabilities to overcome them, analysts say.

Mark Schneider, a former Pentagon strategic forces specialist, said the new Chinese hypersonic glider is a serious threat.

“In testimony before the congressional China commission, an Air Force intelligence analyst revealed that it is nuclear armed although there could also be a conventional version,” Schneider said.

“The Chinese probably see this as one of their ‘assassin’s mace’ weapons which are designed to defeat the US”

According to Schneider, a National Academy of Science study concluded that hypersonic speed was the equivalent very high levels of radar-evading stealth features against air and missile defenses.

“Hypersonic speed also gets you to the target very fast which may be decisive in dealing with mobile targets,” he said.

Retired Navy Capt. Jim Fanell, a former Pacific Fleet intelligence director, said the latest flight test of the DF-ZF represents another demonstration of China’s commitment to aggressively develop asymmetric power projection capabilities and a weapon that could undermine US missile defenses.

“The threat of hypersonic missile attack not only impacts conventional warfare scenarios like we are seeing develop in the South and East China Sea, but it also puts US nuclear defense strategies at risk as well,” Fanell said.

Russian Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin told the newspaper Kommersant in October 2012 that the nation that masters hypersonic weapons first would revolutionize warfare. He compared the strategic significance of the high-speed weapons to development of the first atomic bombs.

By contrast, the Pentagon’s Missile Defense Agency is doing little to deal with the emerging hypersonic missile threat.

Vice Adm. James Syring, the agency director, told a Senate hearing April 13 that two countries he did not name have created major worries about the growing hypersonic missile threat.

Syring said for future missile threats, his agency is looking at upgraded Terminal High-Altitude Area Defense, or THAAD, missile defenses.

Yet despite its $7.5 billion budget for fiscal 2017, the agency has not funded any direct programs to counter hypersonic arms. In the current budget, $23 million was requested for a low-powered laser capable of targeting hypersonic missiles, Syring told a House hearing.

The first test of the laser, however, is not planned until 2021, after China is expected to field its first DF-ZF.

Compared to China’s seven tests, the April 19 hypersonic missile test was the second known test of Moscow’s new high-speed glider.

Stephen Welby, assistant defense secretary for research and engineering, said the Pentagon is increasing investment in hypersonic weapons by 50 percent. The increase is intended to “take those systems from being technology demonstrators to being no-kidding weapons that we could actually think about deploying with our force,” Welby told a Senate hearing April 12.

US hypersonic arms are part of a Pentagon strategy to use highly-advanced technology to enhance US strategic military advantages. Other technologies include robotics, biotech, cyber defenses, and electronic warfare weapons.

An Army hypersonic missile blew up shortly after launch in August 2014.

Other US hypersonic weapons include a missile-launched glider and a scramjet-powered strike vehicle.

SEE ALSO: North Korea is reportedly getting ready for another missile test launch

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: The US Army is sending Apache attack helicopters to fight ISIS in Iraq

US Air Force Staff Sgt. Kenny Holston was named the 2015 Visual Information Awards Program (VIAP) military photographer of the year for his striking photos of military and civilian life. 

Holston's work was selected from among hundreds submitted by military photographers.

The Pentagon's annual competition is decided by a panel of judges at the Defense Information School in Fort Meade, Maryland.

We have included Holston's award winning photos below, alongside the photos of the VIAP runner up, Senior airman Jordan A Castelan, and honorable mention, Air Force Staff Sgt. Marianique Santos.

SEE ALSO: Here are the winners of the 2014 US Military Photographer Awards

Military Photographer of the Year Photo: "Dueling Demonstrations," by Staff Sgt. Kenny Holston, US Air Force

Dueling demonstrations clash as the Klu Klux Klan holds a protest rally on the steps of the South Carolina State House building at the same time as a New Black Panther Party rally coupled with other black activist groups, July 19, 2015, Columbia, South Carolina.

The KKK held the rally to protest against the removal of the Confederate Flag from the State House grounds which was taken down July 10, 2015.

The demonstration groups nearly went head-to-head as both rallies concluded and ended up face-to-face in the streets of downtown Columbia.

In this photo young African American men push past metal barricades which are the only thing between them and several KKK members as they shout at the Klan members to leave or die.

Military Photographer of the Year Photo: "Remembering A Legend," by Staff Sgt. Kenny Holston, US Air Force

A fan mourns the loss of Dean Smith the former North Carolina Tar Heels basketball coach as a memorial service for the legendary coach comes to an end at the Dean Smith Center on February 22, 2015 in Chapel Hill, North Carolina.

Dean Smith passed away on February 7, 2015. He was 83 years old. Smith retired from the University of North Carolina in 1997 after 36 seasons.

His teams won 879 games and had 27 consecutive seasons of at least 20 victories.

While those statistics are staggering many don’t know that earlier in his career Smith also served in the US Air Force and later coached the Air Force baseball and golf teams.

Roy Williams, the current North Carolina coach who spent 10 years as Smith's assistant, said Smith "was the greatest there ever was on the court but far, far better off the court with people."

Military Photographer of the Year Photo: "Chow Time," by Staff Sgt. Kenny Holston, US Air Force

US Air Force Combat Control trainees assigned to Operating Location C, 342nd Training Squadron, laugh with each other while sharing a meal ready to eat during a long day of training February 13, 2015.

Working as a team and keeping morale high within the unit is vital to each Airman’s success as they push through training. At the 342nd TRS both CCT and Special Operations Weather Team trainees go through four months of grueling tactical and class room training.

Russia is facing a governmental crisis that could radically alter the shape and structure of the country in the coming years.

According to Nikolay Petrov, a visiting fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations, the government of Russian President Vladimir Putin could fail within the coming year.

And this failure will have profound consequences for all of Russia, leading to at the very worst regime change and a proliferation of new institutions and states throughout the Russian Federation.

Petrov, formerly chair of the Carnegie Moscow Center's Society and Regions Program, believes that Russia's current trajectory of military adventurism, the complete sidelining of political-opposition movements, the collapsing Russian economy, and the complete centralization of power with Putin could lead to only three outcomes.

SEE ALSO: Russia's military wants to buy 5 dolphins with perfect teeth for $25,000, and no, they don't want to disclose why

1. Putin manages to mend relations with the West and improve the economy

In the best-case scenario, Putin manages to mend relations with the West over his role in the conflicts in Syria and Ukraine. Additionally, Putin could appoint a selected and apparently liberal politician to a high-rank to show the West that he is serious about reforms.

Such a move, according to Petrov, "would send a positive signal to the West. At the same time, it would go some way towards restoring the balance between liberals and siloviki [current or former members of the security establishment] in the government."

By at least playing lip service to reform while drawing down the country's military commitments overseas, Petrov believes that Putin would then be able to tone down its anti-Western rhetoric while declaring "that it has won the power struggle with the West and restored Russia's greatness on the international stage, and can now re-engage in cooperation from a position of strength."

Should this situation play out, it will only delay Russia's current problems.

It will still not address the underlying failure of Russia to deliver substantial economic or political reforms in the past.

Nor would such a shift manage to address the political imbalance that has resulted from the complete centralization of power under Putin.

Instead, this scenario would save the Russian regime from immediate failure, but it is just the first step in a number of critical reforms that Moscow would have to undertake.

2. Putin is replaced

In the second scenario, Putin is replaced by a younger heir. This would attempt to fix the massive political imbalance in Russia by almost certainly reducing the power of the Russian presidency while elevating the power of existing Russian institutions.

But Petrov notes that replacing Putin would still carry multitudinous difficulties as "the foundations of the system need to be rebuilt."

"The relatively orderly transition of power that followed the death of Josef Stalin — for example — could not be repeated, due to the lack of an institution such as the Communist Party to hold the country together," Petrov writes. "Rather, Putin's inner circle would lose its position of power with his departure."

The US Air Force's push to develop operational flying saucers 60 years ago laid the conceptual groundwork for one of the variants of Lockheed Martin's F-35, MIT Technology Review reports. 

The F-35 comes in three variants, with key mechanical differences for the Air Force, Marines, and Navy - the F-35A, F-35B, and F-35C respectively.

Of the three models, the F-35B is the most technologically different. 

Unlike the F-35A and F-35C, the Marines needed their variant to be capable of conducting short take-off and vertical landing (STOVL) operations.

This request necessitated that the F-35B be given a lifting fan. And, as Desire Francine G. Fedrigo, Ricardo Gobato, Alekssander Gobato note in a paper at the Cornell University Library, the F-35B's lifting fan has its conceptual roots in flying saucers. 

Between 1954 and 1961, the US Air Force spent $10 million attempting to develop a flying saucer that became known as an Avrocar. The Avrocar was a vertical and/or short take-off and landing (V/STOL) saucer that was powered by one giant central fan.

Despite its seven years of development, the Air Force failed to make the Avrocar into a mission capable vehicle that could potentially replace helicopters. 

MIT Technology Review notes that the aircraft was "hot and almost unbearably uncomfortable for the pilot. And it demonstrated various idiosyncrasies such as taking five seconds to turn 90 degrees to the left but 11 seconds to turn the same amount to the right, presumably because of its central rotating fan."

However, despite the Avrocars' failings, the technology did point researchers towards the feasibility of developing and embedding a central lift fan turbine within an aircraft for variations of vertical take-off and landing (VTOL) technology.  

"The concept of a lift fan, driven by a turbojet engine is not dead, and lives today as a key component of Lockheed X-35 Joint Strike Fighter contender," Fedrigo notes, adding that the conceptual framework of the Avrocar helped General Electric's own development of a booster fan propulsion system. 

Whereas the Avrocar's development ultimately failed, though, GE's "Vertifan" went on to prove the concept of successful lifting fan technology. This in turn lead to a DARPA sponsored development challenge that gave birth to lifting fans being used in the F-35B. 

The F-35B was declared ready for combat by the Marine Corps on July 31. 

SEE ALSO: The F-35 can't outmaneuver a plane it is meant to replace

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: 5 of the most elite special forces in the world

The National Museum of the United States Air Force in Dayton, Ohio, is a treasure trove of the greatest, most iconic aircraft in history, which you can tour at home, online, right now, for free.

From the propeller-driven planes of World War I to the fighters and bombers that turned the tide against Hitler in World War II, all the way up to today's fleet staples and experimental aircraft that never made the cut, the museum's virtual tour is an aviation nut's dream come true.

But even better than a digital walk through, the museum provides excellent high-definition panoramic photos of the interiors of some of the most beloved aircraft in history.

In the slides below, step into at the cockpits of the B-29, B-52, SR-71, and many more:

SEE ALSO: Congress wants the Air Force to prove the F-35 can take over for the A-10

Here we see the cockpit of the SPAD XIII C.1, a French biplane fighter aircraft from World War I.

Full panoramic view

The World War II section is stacked.

Full panoramic view

Here we see the British Spitfire Mk. Vc's cockpit.

Full panoramic view