New Russian Weapons and Missile Defense

[RMNIXON]

First Story:

May 29 2007 4:56PM
Europe should not become "powder keg" - Putin

MOSCOW. May 29 (Interfax) - Russian President Vladimir Putin has cautioned against turning Europe into a "powder keg", referring to Washington's plans to deploy elements of its missile defense system in Europe.

"We consider it harmful and dangerous to turn Europe into a "powder keg" and to fill it with new kinds of weapons," Putin told a news conference after talks with the Portuguese prime minister in Moscow.

"It creates new unneeded risks for the entire system of international and European relations," he said.

Interfax > Politics

Second Story:

May 29 2007 7:38PM
Advanced cruise missiles successfully tested in Russia - Ivanov

ZNAMENSK (Astrakhan region). May 29 (Interfax-AVN) - Advanced strategic and tactical cruise missiles that are immune to all existing and future missile defense systems have been successfully tested in Russia, First Deputy Prime Minister Sergei Ivanov told journalists in Znamensk on Tuesday.
"These complexes are capable of overcoming all existing and future missile defense systems. That is why, from the point of view of defense and security, Russians can look into the future without any worriers," he said.

Interfax > Politics

Now take note both these briefs are linked on the same page. So it is a major problem if Western Europe should want some measure of missile protection (against anybody), but it is not a problem for Russian to develope and test new weapons designed to get through those very same systems. Who feels safer now? Glad the Russian have no worries!

[DosEquis]

It can be argued that the Russians are only developing these missiles because we are developing a defense system. This defense system we are creating is also against some treaties that we signed regarding nuclear weapons.

[6SpeedTA95]

Originally Posted by DosEquis

It can be argued that the Russians are only developing these missiles because we are developing a defense system. This defense system we are creating is also against some treaties that we signed regarding nuclear weapons.

I dont really give a damn in that regard. We need a missile defense system. Although I think we should have done it as a black project personally.

[DosEquis]

We need it to protect us from who? The only ones with a capability of reaching the united states that are considered rivals are China and Russia. They have so many that our defense has no chance of even remotely thinking about shooting them all down.

We already trade with China, in the hundreds of billions. They would never think to start a conflict with us as we are a major portion of their economic livelyhood.

The typeofdong NK missles can't reach here, fail nearly every time they test, and they just tested a small nuclear explosion, no where near capable of mounting to a weapon.

The type of nuclear explosions we should be concerned with are those related to the "dirty bomb". The missile defense is worthless against it. Terrorist organizations could never afford to buy a nuclear loaded ICBM, not to mention there is no nation which would allow its launch from their soil no matter how bad they hated the US.

Further how are we supposed to preach stand down, disarm, no proliferation, yet we spend more today on the development and maintenance of nuclear weapons than we did at the height of the cold war? How can we tell them to stand down and that we are a peaceful country when we do that and combine it with a missile defense system? Not to mention it is extremely expensive, not so reliable, if it does work it can only shoot down one at a time, type system.

The best thing to do is honor our treaties and impliment a policy comparable to what Ron Paul is advocating for. If Russia, China, NK, or whoever start to become imperialist we handle it then. At that time we bring out diplomacy, establish a good amount of allies willing to participate in a military conflict and have the congress declare war. Our policies have reactions and some times consequences. Listen to Ron Paul on this one fellas.

[RMNIXON]

Originally Posted by 6SpeedTA95

I dont really give a damn in that regard. We need a missile defense system. Although I think we should have done it as a black project personally.

So they don't have a right to defend themselves but Russia has a right to make sure they can kill them for "their" defense. Is that about it?

[garbagemanlb]

I think this just proves how much of a waste of money this 'missile shield' was.

[Diesel66]

Originally Posted by garbagemanlb

I think this just proves how much of a waste of money this 'missile shield' was.

The shield wasnt designed to protect us from a full blast from Russia.

[Kytro]

Originally Posted by 6SpeedTA95

I dont really give a damn in that regard. We need a missile defense system. Although I think we should have done it as a black project personally.

The problem here is that the US often attacks other nations for not following the rules but is happy to do when it suits US interests.

[Diesel66]

Originally Posted by Kytro

The problem here is that the US often attacks other nations for not following the rules but is happy to do when it suits US interests.

We removed ourself from the ballistic missile treaty.

[Kytro]

Originally Posted by Diesel66

We removed ourself from the ballistic missile treaty.

If Iran removed themselves from the NPT? Would then the US allow them to develop nuclear arms?

The point is the US only sticks to things that suit the US, but complain when other nations do the same.

[Diesel66]

Originally Posted by Kytro

If Iran removed themselves from the NPT? Would then the US allow them to develop nuclear arms?

We would have zero say in the matter other then sitting on the sideline and bitching.

[nbiggershaft]

Originally Posted by RMNIXON

So they don't have a right to defend themselves but Russia has a right to make sure they can kill them for "their" defense. Is that about it?

Actually, yes. Thats exactly the idea. It's kept world powers honest for the last 50 years or so.

[DosEquis]

Originally Posted by Diesel66

We removed ourself from the ballistic missile treaty.

Right. We also have 530 minutemen ICBMs with 800 war heads, and the trident II with multiple warheads on our subs. Each boomer can hold up to 24 missiles. SO...we remove ourselves from the treaty, have that kind of fire power on 24/7 notice, are expanding on that with things like nuclear bunker busters, developing a missile shield of some sort...

Doesn't that seem hypocritical to you? Don't you see the consequences of a policy like that? Some people apparently have not gotten the memo that the cold war is over.

[Stylerod]

Originally Posted by DosEquis

Right. We also have 530 minutemen ICBMs with 800 war heads, and the trident II with multiple warheads on our subs. Each boomer can hold up to 24 missiles. SO...we remove ourselves from the treaty, have that kind of fire power on 24/7 notice, are expanding on that with things like nuclear bunker busters, developing a missile shield of some sort...

Doesn't that seem hypocritical to you? Don't you see the consequences of a policy like that? Some people apparently have not gotten the memo that the cold war is over.

Didn't we offer to develop this with Russia and they refused?

And once this system works it can be used to protect all our allies, not just the US mainland. I think we need it and am glad it's being developed.

[Publius]

Originally Posted by Diesel66

We would have zero say in the matter other then sitting on the sideline and bitching.

But WOULD we do that? No, we'd attack them.

[DosEquis]

Originally Posted by Stylerod

Didn't we offer to develop this with Russia and they refused?

And once this system works it can be used to protect all our allies, not just the US mainland. I think we need it and am glad it's being developed.

I am not sure if we did that or not. All i know is we removed ourselves from that treaty and continued developing a missile defense system and new additional nuclear weapons.

Are we going to charge rent or something to our allies for this kind of protection? Why is it our responsibility to police the world? Who do we need this protection from?

[Stylerod]

Originally Posted by DosEquis

I am not sure if we did that or not. All i know is we removed ourselves from that treaty and continued developing a missile defense system and new additional nuclear weapons.

Are we going to charge rent or something to our allies for this kind of protection? Why is it our responsibility to police the world? Who do we need this protection from?

N Korea. Iran. Pakistan. China. Anyone else in the future. It's good technology to have developed since we don't know what the future holds. Stopping an Iranian nuke from hitting Israel does the whole world a lot of good in the long run. Wouldn't you think?

[Donkey®]

Originally Posted by RMNIXON

First Story:

May 29 2007 4:56PM
Europe should not become "powder keg" - Putin

MOSCOW. May 29 (Interfax) - Russian President Vladimir Putin has cautioned against turning Europe into a "powder keg", referring to Washington's plans to deploy elements of its missile defense system in Europe.

"We consider it harmful and dangerous to turn Europe into a "powder keg" and to fill it with new kinds of weapons," Putin told a news conference after talks with the Portuguese prime minister in Moscow.

"It creates new unneeded risks for the entire system of international and European relations," he said.

Interfax > Politics

Second Story:

May 29 2007 7:38PM
Advanced cruise missiles successfully tested in Russia - Ivanov

ZNAMENSK (Astrakhan region). May 29 (Interfax-AVN) - Advanced strategic and tactical cruise missiles that are immune to all existing and future missile defense systems have been successfully tested in Russia, First Deputy Prime Minister Sergei Ivanov told journalists in Znamensk on Tuesday.
"These complexes are capable of overcoming all existing and future missile defense systems. That is why, from the point of view of defense and security, Russians can look into the future without any worriers," he said.

Interfax > Politics

Now take note both these briefs are linked on the same page. So it is a major problem if Western Europe should want some measure of missile protection (against anybody), but it is not a problem for Russian to develope and test new weapons designed to get through those very same systems. Who feels safer now? Glad the Russian have no worries!

Ah, more of the "we're allowed to do whatever the fuck we want and nobody else is allowed to do shit or we'll cry about it" syndrome.

[Donkey®]

Originally Posted by Stylerod

N Korea. Iran. Pakistan. China. Anyone else in the future. It's good technology to have developed since we don't know what the future holds. Stopping an Iranian nuke from hitting Israel does the whole world a lot of good in the long run. Wouldn't you think?

There are OTHER ways to deliver nukes besides missiles.