Russian Threats

Originally posted by malganis
So basically by putting missile defence systems right near Russia, it means that if they wanted to, the USA could attack Russia and Russia wouldn't be able to do anything about it?

Another question, if Europe don't want to be attacked, why aren't they the ones building the defence systems?

oh and, is it a possibility that Russia would answer this by building anti-missile systems in Cuba?


cheers

[edit on 23/6/2007 by malganis]

It depends on just how accurate and powerful this missile defense system is. Theoretically, yes, the United States could attack Russia and stop a Russian retaliation. That's why Russia has such a problem with it.

The only reason Europe is a target of Russia now is because this missile defense system. I think Czech Republic and Poland accepted because they're NATO countries, and the United States is a major military ally because of it. So there was probably pressure behind the scenes.

As for building them in Cuba, I doubt it. I think Cuba is too close for that to happen. My scenario was just hypothetical to make people imagine how they'd feel. But what Russia's response may be is to either update their nuclear arsenal, and/or preemptively attack the missile defense sites. Both are possible.

an armed-to-teeth robber called a resident who is gonna defend his property a threat...

amaze me

NovusOrdoMundi and Pericle - you've got it.

The alleged defensive shield is designed to be the impregnable fortress from which the US launches its attacks.

It is totally provocative and has already turned the heat up on nuclear annihilation because China has said that, if the defensive shield goes in, they will build enough missiles to overwhelm it by sheer weight of numbers. And bear in mind, China now has the technology, capacity and economic strength to do it. And you don't have to overwhelm it with nuclear tipped missiles - anything that convinces a computer that it is a threat will do. Save the nukes for when the shield is depleted. Bye Bye NYC - Bye Bye LA. Drop a couple on Yellowstone and see if the super-caldera can be triggered - 150 million dead and not just city folk.

What is the US up to? Surely it does not still believe its own arrogant rhetoric as to being the only super-power in the world. The world has woken up to the imperialism and lies of the US. And, like it or not, the rest of the world is a bigger super-power than the US. Only a few gullible countries like Australia still believe the deceptions of the US. The rest of the world is playing the US at its own game by taking advantage of its technology and greed; all the while noting its weaknesses and soft spots such as its predeliction for using private enterprise to provide military support services instead of in-house uniformed personnel. That is going to bite big time. All that profit slushed into rich bastards' pockets is going to cost many lives when the real shooting match starts.

When the big war starts it will be the rest of the world against the US. Let's see how "the world's only super-power" fares then.

Ok, to start, you are all very uneducated on what this system is supposed to be, and what kind of missiles it is supposed to stop. It is designed to stop theater ballistic missiles, not the ICBM's that Russia operates. And besides that, there will only be like 10-20 batteries, not nearly enough to stop even a quarter of the ICBM's that Russia could throw at it. Russia no longer has the type of missiles it was designed to stop, as they were destroyed after the signing of the 1987 Ballistic missile treaty.

The only reason Russia is upset is because the US now has allies in it's former sphere of influence.

Originally posted by ludaChris
Ok, to start, you are all very uneducated on what this system is supposed to be, and what kind of missiles it is supposed to stop. It is designed to stop theater ballistic missiles, not the ICBM's that Russia operates. And besides that, there will only be like 10-20 batteries, not nearly enough to stop even a quarter of the ICBM's that Russia could throw at it. Russia no longer has the type of missiles it was designed to stop, as they were destroyed after the signing of the 1987 Ballistic missile treaty.

The only reason Russia is upset is because the US now has allies in it's former sphere of influence.

Yes, we're all uneducated because we can think on our own, do our own research, and don't get force fed propaganda as easy as some.

Once again, some people can't seem to understand what "first strike" capability actually means for a powerful military against another powerful military.

How about you become educated on that and then come back?

Originally posted by NovusOrdoMundi

Originally posted by ludaChris
Ok, to start, you are all very uneducated on what this system is supposed to be, and what kind of missiles it is supposed to stop. It is designed to stop theater ballistic missiles, not the ICBM's that Russia operates. And besides that, there will only be like 10-20 batteries, not nearly enough to stop even a quarter of the ICBM's that Russia could throw at it. Russia no longer has the type of missiles it was designed to stop, as they were destroyed after the signing of the 1987 Ballistic missile treaty.

The only reason Russia is upset is because the US now has allies in it's former sphere of influence.

Yes, we're all uneducated because we can think on our own, do our own research, and don't get force fed propaganda as easy as some.

Once again, some people can't seem to understand what "first strike" capability actually means for a powerful military against another powerful military.

How about you become educated on that and then come back?

The US Government are the most self-centered genocidal maniacs on the planet. They don't give a damn what Russians think!

To them Manifest Destiny is an instruction manual. The world belongs to them! If anyone(like Putin) disagrees, he/she becomes a problem, a barrier, a threat that should be removed!

Ever since 1918 the US has been undermining Russia and trying to make her weak so that the US can dominate over the World's largest country!

There were no "mistakes" by the US in the 1990's econimic destruction in Russia, EVERYTHING DONE BACK THEN WAS ACCORDING TO PLAN! Anyone who believes otherwise is delusional.

Just like the Missiles are "according to plan". They failed to dominate Russia in the 1990's. So now they move to the next aggressive phase of having the power to do what Napoleon and Hitler could not, swiftly destroy and occupy Russia!

The United States will fail just like Hitler and Napoleon.

Originally posted by NovusOrdoMundi
Yes, we're all uneducated because we can think on our own, do our own research, and don't get force fed propaganda as easy as some.

Once again, some people can't seem to understand what "first strike" capability actually means for a powerful military against another powerful military.

How about you become educated on that and then come back?

Wait, this missile system, which needs other missiles to be fired at it first for a target(it's an ABM system), is a first strike weapon? It's not gonna take down an ICBM's multiple MIRV warheads upon reentry, they simply travel too fast. It in no way threatens Russia's ability to make a first strike, assuming they would be stupid enough to do so and set off the end of us all, as the US and other allied nuclear states would certainly reply in kind. So, what's your argument here, you make no attempt to rebuke anything I stated, you simply shot it down without providing your reason.



[edit on 7/8/2007 by ludaChris]

Originally posted by ludaChris

Originally posted by NovusOrdoMundi
Yes, we're all uneducated because we can think on our own, do our own research, and don't get force fed propaganda as easy as some.

Once again, some people can't seem to understand what "first strike" capability actually means for a powerful military against another powerful military.

How about you become educated on that and then come back?

Wait, this missile system, which needs other missiles to be fired at it first for a target(it's an ABM system), is a first strike weapon? It's not gonna take down an ICBM's multiple MIRV warheads upon reentry, they simply travel too fast. It in no way threatens Russia's ability to make a first strike, assuming they would be stupid enough to do so and set off the end of us all, as the US and other allied nuclear states would certainly reply in kind. So, what's your argument here, you make no attempt to rebuke anything I stated, you simply shot it down without providing your reason.



[edit on 7/8/2007 by ludaChris]

Yes because your "you are all very uneducated" was a good argument.

Let me help you understand..

I, along with others, are not claiming that missile defense missiles will be fired in an attack. Is this hard to understand? No? Moving on..

Now, that means since defensive weapons won't be fired....OFFENSIVE weapons will be fired! Hard to understand? No? Moving on..

Now, let's piece it together..

If you have a missile defense system capable of shooting down missiles, this gives you "first strike ability". Do you know how? You're able to launch OFFENSIVE missiles, and then you have the ability to shoot down incoming missiles with the DEFENSIVE missiles, the ones Russia is complaining about.

That is first strike ability. First strike ability is the ability to go on the offense, and defend against the retaliation. This is why superpowers don't go to war often, because rarely do you get a 'first strike ability' against another superpower. Had this ever existed in the Cold War, the world would be very different right now.

If either one of these countries gets a first strike ability, there will be war.

This is why I keep saying a defensive weapon can lead to an offensive attack. I'm not saying defensive weapons will be USED in the offensive attack. I'm saying that defensive weapons capable of stopping a retaliatory strike give you the opportunity to go on the offense and launch the first strike, thus giving you first strike ability.

It seems you're having trouble understanding this.

This missile defense system gives the US first strike ability against Russia.

Why Poland and Czech Republic? Why not Azerbaijan? Why not Israel? Why not Kenya? Theoretically, any of these locations could stop an Iranian missile, if the missile defense system is as good as they say it is.

This is for Russia. It's obvious.

[edit on 7/8/07 by NovusOrdoMundi]

Originally posted by NovusOrdoMundi
The US Government are the most self-centered genocidal maniacs on the planet. They don't give a damn what Russians think!

To them Manifest Destiny is an instruction manual. The world belongs to them! If anyone(like Putin) disagrees, he/she becomes a problem, a barrier, a threat that should be removed!

Ever since 1918 the US has been undermining Russia and trying to make her weak so that the US can dominate over the World's largest country!

There were no "mistakes" by the US in the 1990's econimic destruction in Russia, EVERYTHING DONE BACK THEN WAS ACCORDING TO PLAN! Anyone who believes otherwise is delusional.

Just like the Missiles are "according to plan". They failed to dominate Russia in the 1990's. So now they move to the next aggressive phase of having the power to do what Napoleon and Hitler could not, swiftly destroy and occupy Russia!

Wow, straight out of an ANSWER manual.

I believe it was the US who helped make the Russians strong. Do you have any idea how much raw and war material the US gave the Russians during the lend-lease act? Enough for the Russians to go on the counteroffensive against the Germans and push them all the way back to Berlin!!!

I fail to see your point, it was the cold war, both sides were undermining each other, and still do. Its a two way street, and you obviously don't see that.

The US didn't have to dominate Russia in the 90's. We just had to wait while Russia tried to keep up on defense spending and ended up running themselves into the ground. All we did was compete, and won. Russia didn't have to run itself down like that, but chose to. I wonder how many warnings their economists gave their government prior to this happening.

I fail to see how a DEFENSIVE missile system undermines Russian sovereignty? A small batch of ABM missiles(which probly won't even be all that great), even if they were 100% accurate wouldn't dent the surface a Russian first strike. You obviously can't wrap your mind around that simple fact.

Originally posted by ludaChris

Originally posted by NovusOrdoMundi
The US Government are the most self-centered genocidal maniacs on the planet. They don't give a damn what Russians think!

To them Manifest Destiny is an instruction manual. The world belongs to them! If anyone(like Putin) disagrees, he/she becomes a problem, a barrier, a threat that should be removed!

Ever since 1918 the US has been undermining Russia and trying to make her weak so that the US can dominate over the World's largest country!

There were no "mistakes" by the US in the 1990's econimic destruction in Russia, EVERYTHING DONE BACK THEN WAS ACCORDING TO PLAN! Anyone who believes otherwise is delusional.

Just like the Missiles are "according to plan". They failed to dominate Russia in the 1990's. So now they move to the next aggressive phase of having the power to do what Napoleon and Hitler could not, swiftly destroy and occupy Russia!

Wow, straight out of an ANSWER manual

.



I fail to see your point, it was the cold war, both sides were undermining each other, and still do. Its a two way street, and you obviously don't see that.

The US didn't have to dominate Russia in the 90's. We just had to wait while Russia tried to keep up on defense spending and ended up running themselves into the ground. All we did was compete, and won. Russia didn't have to run itself down like that, but chose to. I wonder how many warnings their economists gave their government prior to this happening.

I fail to see how a DEFENSIVE missile system undermines Russian sovereignty? A small batch of ABM missiles(which probly won't even be all that great), even if they were 100% accurate wouldn't dent the surface a Russian first strike. You obviously can't wrap your mind around that simple fact.

I believe it was the US who helped make the Russians strong. Do you have any idea how much raw and war material the US gave the Russians during the lend-lease act? Enough for the Russians to go on the counteroffensive against the Germans and push them all the way back to Berlin!!!

to be precsie only 15% percent of the soviet war effort,the only significant contribution was in mobility of soviet army and lend lease became significant russian victroy of stalingrad and kursk....by then it had proven its capability to battle wehramcht single handly.... as you are half french remember how when france attacked russia what ultimately happened to frnace , it lost

But what about lend-lease? Let us hear what one of the most serious publications of the American bourgeoisie has to say on this subject. Leland Stowe in an article in the October issue of the quarterly Foreign Affairs writes:


“The American lend-lease and British supplies did not reach Soviet Russia in sufficient proportions to become a major factor in the crucial defensive fighting along the Don, in the northern Caucasus and at Stalingrad during the summer and early autumn of 1942. This flow became really important only about the time that the Russians had already demonstrated their bulldog grip on Stalingrad.”

Mr. Stowe is compelled to admit that the Red Army’s military record represents an “exclusively Soviet achievement.” In public the capitalist press of course loudly denies this. But among themselves these gentlemen prefer the truth.
www.marxists.org...

Lend lease material accounted for almost 10% of all Russian war material.
www.theeasternfront.co.uk...

We just had to wait while Russia tried to keep up on defense spending and ended up running themselves into the ground. All we did was compete, and won. .

rather the falling oil prices triggered the fall of soviet union

The table 1/2 way down this page graphically illustrates Swenson's points. How were such large increases in reserve size possible without correspondingly large discoveries? The answer is quite fascinating as it connects to the Reagan administration's amazingly simple strategy to collapse the Soviet Union: bring down the price of oil. Professor Richard Heinberg explains:
Soon after assuming office in 1981, the Reagan Administration abandoned the established policy of pursuing détente with the Soviet Union and instead instituted a massive arms buildup; it also fomented proxy wars in areas of Soviet influence, while denying the Soviets desperately needed oil equipment and technology. Then, in the mid -1980s, Washington persuaded Saudi Arabia to flood the world market with cheap oil. Throughout the last decade of its existence, the USSR pumped and sold its oil at the maximum possible rate in order to earn income with which to keep up in the arms race and prosecute its war in Afghanistan. Yet with markets awash with cheap Saudi oil, the Soviets were earning less even as they pumped more. Two years after their oil production peaked, the economy of the USSR crumbled and its government collapsed.
(See also, Victory: The Reagan Administration's Secret Strategy to Hasten the Collapse of the Soviet Union by Peter Schweizer)



While Reagan's strategy to collapse the Soviets was as simple as it was effective, it came with a catch: the amount of oil an OPEC nation such as Saudi Arabia could pump was tied to the amount of proven reserves it reported as compared to the other OPEC nations. The only way Saudi Arabia could continue to flood the market in support of Reagan's strategy was to revise its oil reserve estimates upwards. (If they had not done so, the Reagan adiministration would have withdrawn their military support of the Saudi Royal family.)
www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net...

Originally posted by ludaChris

Originally posted by NovusOrdoMundi
The US Government are the most self-centered genocidal maniacs on the planet. They don't give a damn what Russians think!

To them Manifest Destiny is an instruction manual. The world belongs to them! If anyone(like Putin) disagrees, he/she becomes a problem, a barrier, a threat that should be removed!

Ever since 1918 the US has been undermining Russia and trying to make her weak so that the US can dominate over the World's largest country!

There were no "mistakes" by the US in the 1990's econimic destruction in Russia, EVERYTHING DONE BACK THEN WAS ACCORDING TO PLAN! Anyone who believes otherwise is delusional.

Just like the Missiles are "according to plan". They failed to dominate Russia in the 1990's. So now they move to the next aggressive phase of having the power to do what Napoleon and Hitler could not, swiftly destroy and occupy Russia!

Wow, straight out of an ANSWER manual

.

.

I fail to see how a DEFENSIVE missile system undermines Russian sovereignty? A small batch of ABM missiles(which probly won't even be all that great), even if they were 100% accurate wouldn't dent the surface a Russian first strike. You obviously can't wrap your mind around that simple fact.

I fail to see how a DEFENSIVE missile system undermines Russian sovereignty? A small batch of ABM missiles(which probly won't even be all that great), even if they were 100% accurate wouldn't dent the surface a Russian first strike. You obviously can't wrap your mind around that simple fact.

a current small batch , but in future it could larger As the Russians see it, the X-band tracking radar in the Czech Republic will pry deep into the European part of Russia up to the Urals, while the anti-missile base in Poland is intended to provide cover for the radar

Evidently, Moscow takes the United States' deployment in Europe very seriously. No amount of US propaganda that the deployments are intended against Iran carries conviction in Moscow. As the Russians see it, the X-band tracking radar in the Czech Republic will pry deep into the European part of Russia up to the Urals, while the anti-missile base in Poland is intended to provide cover for the radar.

The belief is rooted in Moscow that the US missile-defense deployments aim at destroying Russia's strategic parity with the US. An essay featured in Foreign Affairs magazine in its March-April 2006 issue titled "The rise of US nuclear primacy" received huge attention among the Russian strategic community. It held out a chilling warning: "The age of MAD [mutual assured destruction] is nearing an end. Today, for the first time in almost 50 years, the United States stands on the verge of attaining nuclear primacy. It will probably soon be possible for the United States to destroy the long-range nuclear arsenals of Russia or China with a first strike ... Russia and China - and the rest of the world - will live in the shadow of US nuclear primacy for many years to come."

--
The Russian military has assessed, and the Russian leadership is convinced by now, that in reality the ABM system is an integral part of a formidable US strategic system that could incrementally within the next five years or so give the US a first-strike capability. For instance, over the past three years alone, more than 6,000 Tomahawk missile launchers have been deployed extensively on US naval platforms. As of now, the US possesses the capability to shell all strategically important targets on Russian soil.

In comparison with the US strategic buildup in the post-Cold War era, post-Soviet Russia's strategic nuclear arsenal has sharply deteriorated. Russia is estimated to possess almost 40% fewer long-range bombers, 60% fewer intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), and 80% fewer ballistic-missile submarines.

But what the Russians fear the most is that the proposed ABM systems in Central Europe will plug important gaps in the overall US capability to launch a devastating first strike on Russia's nuclear capability. For instance, the proposed radar in the Czech Republic would be capable of determining the parameters of the trajectories of Russian ballistic missiles during the first few seconds after their launch (as against the gap of several minutes needed under the existing shipboard or space surveillance systems), which would make it far easier to bring down the missiles.

Russian military experts have written how, with a surreptitious concentration of its naval strike formations in the regions of the Barents Sea and the Baltic Sea, US cruise missiles could target at one go the Russian silo and mobile ICBM launchers as well as submarines with ballistic missiles and strategic air groups. Such a strike could also target simultaneously the armed forces' command points, its missile-defense systems, airfields, naval bases and communications systems.

A second strike could follow using deck-based aircraft on aircraft carriers and the strategic air force targeting land forces and military-industrial complexes on the whole. A Russian military expert, Mikhail Volzhenskiy, wrote recently in Izvestia, "The probability of such a scenario is very high. We recall Afghanistan, Yugoslavia and Iraq, where the American operations commenced with the concentrated use of long-range cruise missiles. Undoubtedly, our political and military leaderships have taken into account this experience in working out their strategy ... Thus we perceive the deployment of the ABM system in Europe in particular as an attempt to unilaterally destroy the existing balance of forces on the continent and in the world."

www.warandpeace.ru...

Never seen a Russian site sound so afraid. It is my understanding that Russia is ahead in missile technology, look at the PAC-3, a good system, but certainly not the best. I just don't understand how you think, this ABM system will be able to take down ICBM's and hurt Russia's strategic abliity? It can't and I don't know of an interceptor that can take down the multiple warheads they carry upon reentry. I don't believe it possible at this point. Give it maybe 15-20 and yeah, the tech will probably be there. It's not like Russia still can't attack the US over the pole, or from the west of us. I don't see this hurting them at all, its an early system that probably won't even be all that effective. Crying of spilt milk in my opinion. I still believe Russia is more concerned about her influence than these missiles, which is much more understandable.

Originally posted by ludaChris
I just don't understand how you think, this ABM system will be able to take down ICBM's and hurt Russia's strategic abliity? I don't believe it possible at this point. Give it maybe 15-20 and yeah, the tech will probably be there. It's not like Russia still can't attack the US over the pole, or from the west of us. I don't see this hurting them at all, its an early system that probably won't even be all that effective. Crying of spilt milk in my opinion. I still believe Russia is more concerned about her influence than these missiles, which is much more understandable.

Never seen a Russian site sound so afraid. It is my understanding that Russia is ahead in missile technology, look at the PAC-3, a good system, but certainly not the best.

yes ahead , but well think of something why is usa deploying radars cAPABLE OF seeing deep in european russia , that upto the urals realise that

It can't and I don't know of an interceptor that can take down the multiple warheads they carry upon reentry.

but if USA launches a first strike looking at its current state of hen house radars usa can successfully launch a premeptive strike destroyin the russian nuclear arsenal and whatever few handful russian nukes lauched would be destroyed by US ABM system

heres a testimony of former soviet colonel ivan krutov:

RM: Seeing the great things the US has done worldwide, during and after the Cold War, how can you be so naive as to see us as so evil? As for your claims of bringing revived “Soviet superiority”, how do you feel about the concept of Mutually Assured Destruction?

RM: Seeing the great things the US has done worldwide, during and after the Cold War, how can you be so naive as to see us as so evil? As for your claims of bringing revived “Soviet superiority”, how do you feel about the concept of Mutually Assured Destruction?



IK: This is my personal, subjective view. The Americans destroyed my home country and occupied its land, after all.

I predicted the fall of the MAD system by 2001. And it has really fallen! By 2001, RUSSIA IS NO LONGER OFFICIALLY CONSIDERED AS A NUCLEAR POWER BY NATO. Why? Because Russia cannot retaliate. The RVSN (Russian nuclear missile army) is in ruins, the first warning system is destroyed (I have plans for a Russian warning system). Americans can destroy all the Russian nukes before they can even start—even without using US nukes, just with cruise missiles, placed in the ex-Soviet republics. Forget about the Cold War. Russia was never a military superpower. The Soviet Union was. Not Russia.

As a military specialist, I have been analyzing a possible American attack on Russia for many years. It is a real threat, I assure you

clearly ex soviet republics are becoming nato members . read krutov
's statement
'Americans can destroy all the Russian nukes before they can even start—even without using US nukes, just with cruise missiles, placed in the ex-Soviet republics.'

I still believe Russia is more concerned about her influence than these missiles, which is much more understandable.

in my opinion more for survival

The Russian military has assessed, and the Russian leadership is convinced by now, that in reality the ABM system is an integral part of a formidable US strategic system that could incrementally within the next five years or so give the US a devastating first-strike capability. For instance, over the past three years alone, more than 6,000 Tomahawk missile launchers have been deployed extensively on US naval platforms. As of now, the US possesses the capability to shell all strategically important targets on Russian soil.
In comparison with the US strategic buildup in the post-Cold War era, post-Soviet Russia's strategic nuclear arsenal has sharply deteriorated. Russia is estimated to possess almost 40% fewer long-range bombers, 60% fewer intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), and 80% fewer ballistic-missile submarines.

But what the Russians fear the most is that the proposed ABM systems in Central Europe will plug important gaps in the overall US capability to launch a devastating first strike on Russia's nuclear capability. For instance, the proposed radar in the Czech Republic would be capable of determining the parameters of the trajectories of Russian ballistic missiles during the first few seconds after their launch (as against the gap of several minutes needed under the existing shipboard or space surveillance systems), which would make it far easier to bring down the missiles
www.warandpeace.ru...

seems that colonel krutov was right