It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Russia urges US to avoid space arms race (NATO running Amok)

page: 1
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 19 2005 @ 06:41 AM
link   
Russia would consider using force if necessary to respond if the US put a combat weapon into space, according to a senior Russian official.

According to a New York Times report yesterday, the Bush administration was moving towards implementing a new space policy that would move the US closer to placing offensive and defensive weapons in space. Russia, China and many US allies oppose any weaponisation of space, partly out of concerns that it would lead to an extremely expensive post-cold war arms race.

Vladimir Yermakov, senior counsellor at the Russian embassy in Washington, on Tuesday told a conference on space militarisation that Russia was working through diplomatic channels to urge the US not to move towards fielding weapons in space. But he said Russia would have to react, possibly with force, if the US successfully put a "combat weapon" in space.

news.ft.com...




posted on May, 19 2005 @ 06:50 AM
link   
what do they mean by with force...?
shoot down the weapon in space? that wouldn't be good now would it...



posted on May, 19 2005 @ 08:13 PM
link   
I agree with Russia, but if they used force, it might make things worse.



posted on May, 19 2005 @ 08:40 PM
link   
I am with Russia on this, but shooting down American weapons is just going to make the arrogant american public rush behind their government calling for Russian blood.



posted on May, 19 2005 @ 08:52 PM
link   
arrogant? oh please, we have a right to such weapons, dont like it? too bad, and youre the arrogant ones telling us what we can put in space, we only agreed to not put WMD in space, not to restrict all weapons in space so why should we?



posted on May, 19 2005 @ 11:53 PM
link   
while it is true we never agreed to put weapons other than nuclear weapons in space, it is not a good idea to put any type of weapon in orbit.
What if it fails and comes crashing down after its orbit decayed, if there was anything radioactive in it would spread accross the globe. Other than something that is for missile defense purposes we dont need weapons in space. This administration keeps pushing the envelope, hope we dont push too far.

Arrogant americans? i think you will find that most americans are against weaponization of space.

out of all the countries that are a threat to the US, Russia is perhaps the biggest, however i agree with the russians, this is a bad idea period.


apc

posted on May, 19 2005 @ 11:55 PM
link   
It's just politics.
They will act like hardliners to get something good in exhange for allowing us to put weapons in space.
It's how this stuff has always played out between us.



posted on May, 20 2005 @ 12:14 AM
link   
Yah, but I think the U.S. has enough military defense as it is ($600 billion). If we have too much defense it might make us look like a threat, and nations might turn against us, it's already kind of happening.

[edit on 20-5-2005 by BigPimpin]



posted on May, 20 2005 @ 12:20 AM
link   
Nuclear glow just isn't my color. I'm really not in the mood for radiation sickness or having 7 headed baby leperchauns, if they were to shoot it down, I think the poo would hit the fan and explode into a massive crap storm...


apc

posted on May, 20 2005 @ 12:25 AM
link   

If we have too much defense it might make us look like a threat, and nations might turn against us, it's already kind of happening.

Hahah yeah lemme get some more crisp yummy Freedom Fries.

Nah other countries will whine as usual but when it boils down to it, wouldn't you rather be on the good side of the biggest baddest bully on the block? Do I really need to make another France reference here? "Oh crap the Germans!"
The US has always done and will always do what it wants, when it wants, and how it wants. Sometimes to get what we want, we have to make other countries happy too.. but we still get what we want. When the cards are called, our nation has demonstrated time and time again that we really dont give a rats' about what goes on outside our borders unless it's caught our interest.



posted on May, 20 2005 @ 12:47 AM
link   
Russia whining because they'd like to get in a new arms race but can't afford it is pathetic. We will put weapons in space if it makes sense for us to do. There's nothing Russia would be able to do about it unless they want a full-on hot war with the United States.

[edit on 5/20/2005 by djohnsto77]



posted on May, 20 2005 @ 03:00 AM
link   
And let the baying of the dogs of war commence....

For a conspiracy site people sure seem to be slow to catch on that NASA seems to be fading into the background only to be replaced by a militant air force.



posted on May, 20 2005 @ 07:13 AM
link   
The US has signed a treaty that does not allow us to send nuke weapons into space. Is this another treaty that Bush and co. are just going to snub? Seems likely.

www.cdi.org...


Commonly called the Partial Test Ban Treaty, it seeks to inhibit nuclear proliferation and a nuclear arms race and to protect the environment. The key provisions are found in Article I.

1. Each of the Parties to this Treaty undertakes to prohibit, to prevent, and not to carry out any nuclear weapon test explosion, or any other nuclear explosion, at any place under its jurisdiction or control: (a) in the atmosphere; beyond its limits, including outer space; or under water, including territorial waters or high seas; ...

No nuclear explosions are allowed in space, whether as a test or part of an anti-satellite (ASAT) weapons system or as a component of an anti-ballistic (ABM) missile system. States parties can withdraw from the Treaty upon three months notification.



posted on May, 20 2005 @ 07:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by namehere
arrogant? oh please, we have a right to such weapons, dont like it? too bad, and youre the arrogant ones telling us what we can put in space, we only agreed to not put WMD in space, not to restrict all weapons in space so why should we?


Actually if the rest of the world doesn't like it enough it won't just be too bad it will be war. Just ask Germany, the USSR or any other country that thought it could do anything it wanted without backing from the majority of other powerful nations. You can certainly choose your own path but don't think for one second there will not be consequences if the rest of the world agrees that you have become too much of a threat and decides to do something about it. Unless you think we don't have the right to choose how to respond to the choices you make? Also armed conflict is not the only form of war and i doubt it would be nessesary to contain the US. In cold war 1 the USSR got it's behind kicked because it basically had no allies of significance and the ones it did have mostly had populations that were against the USSR. In cold war 2 if the US does not have the backing of Japan, Europe and other allies (not just the governments but also the people) don't expect to fare well...

[edit on 20-5-2005 by Trent]


apc

posted on May, 20 2005 @ 08:06 AM
link   

... if the rest of the world agrees that you have become too much of a threat and decides to do something about it.

What are they gonna do... sanctions?
hahah
Is the Queen gonna revoke our independance?
Is the EU gonna say "We wont trade with you anymore"
aaaaahhahahaha
Seriously Im not exactly thrilled about our nations attidude toward international politics, but there really is not a damn thing anyone anywhere can do about it. Wanna stop trading with us? Well you can kiss your own economy goodbye.
It would take every single nation on the planet to ally against us through isolationism... Pigs would be launched into Jovian orbit before that happened.
No as usual people are going to comply and cooperate with us because when they dont they tend to get backhanded.
Again I dont really support this attitude, but I will defend to the death our way of life.



posted on May, 20 2005 @ 08:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by apc

... if the rest of the world agrees that you have become too much of a threat and decides to do something about it.

What are they gonna do... sanctions?
hahah
Is the Queen gonna revoke our independance?
Is the EU gonna say "We wont trade with you anymore"
aaaaahhahahaha
Seriously Im not exactly thrilled about our nations attidude toward international politics, but there really is not a damn thing anyone anywhere can do about it. Wanna stop trading with us? Well you can kiss your own economy goodbye.
It would take every single nation on the planet to ally against us through isolationism... Pigs would be launched into Jovian orbit before that happened.
No as usual people are going to comply and cooperate with us because when they dont they tend to get backhanded.
Again I dont really support this attitude, but I will defend to the death our way of life.


my my arent we full of ourselves....

hats down to anyone who think he got it right



posted on May, 20 2005 @ 08:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by djohnsto77
Russia whining because they'd like to get in a new arms race but can't afford it is pathetic. We will put weapons in space if it makes sense for us to do. There's nothing Russia would be able to do about it unless they want a full-on hot war with the United States.


Despite the decrepit state of the Russian military, their space program is still fairly functional, if maybe not top notch. They can develop new systems at a fraction of what it would cost here. Their response can be asymmetric, such as launching 10,000 decoy satellites.

Also:
There can be ruses to circumvent the anti-weapon conventions, such as: they construct a fleet of weather sattelites which carry a large supply of propellant. Just in case. That propellant just happens to be highly explosive. Now, the aft part of the vessel is fortified with a few flanges held in place by 5,000 tungsten nuts and bolts. Just in case.
They just used so many for strength, but of course it's secondary function is shrapnel. Guess what they got themselves: a little space cannon, and perfectly legal.

It's really not in the interest of the US to even start there. We'll sink 600B more into that (even though we are already bankrupt), and in the end it won't solve a thing.


As to "bring them on", we all know how that kind of swagger works in real world.

[edit on 20-5-2005 by Aelita]


apc

posted on May, 20 2005 @ 09:10 AM
link   

my my arent we full of ourselves....

hats down to anyone who think he got it right

Maybe you missed that part but I do believe I said I do not support this attitude. So no... I'm not 'full of myself.'
History has time and time again proven this perspective correct, and it will continue to do so.
Wanna do something about it? Whine to the UN. Maybe they can file a report.



posted on May, 20 2005 @ 09:28 AM
link   
This constante weapons buildup can start a new arms race in the world. The other big nations already feels threaten by USA. We've seen this before. Thats how the WWI and II started. We had dissarmament plans but secretely everybody was arming themselves.

You'll play yourseves on this one I'm afraid.



posted on May, 20 2005 @ 09:53 AM
link   
Anyway lets get away from WHO is doing it and think about whether it's a good thing or not. My answer would be the same regardless of whether it was America, France or Russia wanting to weaponise space. In the end everyone will probably have to follow the lead of whoever does it first, so who is doing it first won't really matter down the track.

[edit on 20-5-2005 by Trent]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join