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: Poland risks attack because of US missiles

page: 6
18
<< 3  4  5    7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 05:23 AM
link   
How much has Israel provoked this conflict?

On UK's Talksport Radio last night, renegade MP George Galloway let it be known that the Georgian Defence Minister is an ex Israeli citizen, is fluent in Hebrew and still holds an Israeli passport.

The Israeli's have been arming and training the Georgians and the Russians are very upset by this.




posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 05:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by Copernicus
Europe should set up some missile defenses in the United States.

I dont see the difference between that and putting US defenses in Europe.


Well the difference is that we (Europeans) wouldn't be pushing our military hardware up against a paranoid unit's borders.



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 05:36 AM
link   
The entire point is moot..... If Russia were to attack a NATO country (which poland is ) They would start WW3 and WW3 will be fought with Nukes.

They know this.. And unless they are willing to start WW3 and End the world as we know it, they will not do a damn thing.. Militarily that is.

You can debate this all you want.. But Russia WILL NOT attack Poland unless they are willing to take on NATO and use Nuclear weapons.

If they are willing to attack a NATO country then all of us can kiss our asses goodbye.



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 05:38 AM
link   
Didn't Russia invade Poland and occupy them for over 50 years? You would think they were well within their rights to build whatever defense system they want, and that Russia should be the last country to winge about it.



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 05:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by Cthulwho
Didn't Russia invade Poland and occupy them for over 50 years? You would think they were well within their rights to build whatever defense system they want, and that Russia should be the last country to winge about it.



That was before Poland was a member of Nato..



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 05:51 AM
link   
reply to post by Cthulwho
 



and Poland aren't building it, the USA are. the issue is what the real reason the USA wants to put it there for.



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 06:08 AM
link   
I don't see this system as a direct threat to Russia. If it is indeed an offensive system then NATO will be able to obliterate Russia in a very short period of time, of course, they already have this ability.

If this is a defensive system then NATO will be able to shoot down a few nuclear missiles, but still be obliterated by Russia, as is now the case.

Instead I see this as a threat to Russian business. If Russia is exporting or helping countries like Iran build nuclear weapons, then this defense system would threaten such contracts.

Perhaps the US knows about Russia's dealings and is building this system in reply.



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 06:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by mattifikation
This might have been said already, but has it occurred to anyone that maybe the U.S. wants Poland to be attacked?

My personal, unbacked by sources hunch is that the U.S. intentionally let Georgia bring the wrath of the Russian military down upon it. First of all, to gauge response. But second, because Russian troops in Georgia are troops that aren't in Iran.

I believe the U.S. was hoping Russia would become embroiled in a guerrilla war like we face in Iraq and Afghanistan. And I think it was only part one. Poland seems to be next, and Poland has a much, much bigger army than Georgia. Russia will roll over them too, but not without casualties. And more importantly, not without costing a great deal of money and leaving a lot of Russian equipment in need of repairs.

If the other former Soviet countries get sucked into this in the same manner, their combined armed forces (plus Poland) actually outnumber Russia's. Nowhere near the tech, but with unconventional warfare that's irrelevant.

You don't have a clue what your talking about mate!!! It obvious you don't live in Europe...
If Poland gets attacked by Russia "ALL" of Europe and NATO will mobilise against Russia...This means WW3...
Also countries like Ukraine/poland etc... have just as good tech if not better than Russias...



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 07:50 AM
link   
Sorry for picking your response; I was going to post this without reference to a specific poster but as it turns out you made yourself a fair target.


Originally posted by Cthulwho
I don't see this system as a direct threat to Russia.


And since your Russian and know how their leaders think your qualified to have a opinion about this, right? Why is it that people with criminal records are not normally allowed to own body armor? Isn't body armor quite a bit less 'offensive' , in terms of force projection, than anti ballistic missile weapons?


If it is indeed an offensive system then NATO will be able to obliterate Russia in a very short period of time, of course, they already have this ability.


NATO is not behind in terms of conventional weaponry but in strategic weapons the Russia federation ( former USSR) have held the advantage to various degrees since at least the mid 70's. Their nuclear arsenal today is as far as i can tell superior but what really gives them a tremendous advantage is the deployment of hundreds of ABM weapon systems ( and the US wishes to deploy 10) deploying anywhere between 400 and 1000 missiles that are at least in theory ready to fire. Officially the US has nothing like it to protect either the continental USA or Europe which will allow the Russians to not only absorb the few missiles Europe can fire but to possibly utterly destroy the continental USA.


If this is a defensive system then NATO will be able to shoot down a few nuclear missiles, but still be obliterated by Russia, as is now the case.


Sure. I don't think it will come to that as logically it would make far more sense to capture Europe intact thus allowing it's infrastructure to be employed towards the possibility of a protracted nuclear war with the US.


Instead I see this as a threat to Russian business. If Russia is exporting or helping countries like Iran build nuclear weapons, then this defense system would threaten such contracts.


Russia can relatively freely export ICBM technologies as they have countermeasures in place and are thus not threatened. The US have largely dismantled their official ABM defenses and are using this as pretext to intervene militarily all over the world to 'defend' themselves.


P erhaps the US knows about Russia's dealings and is building this system in reply.


The US have been aware of the USSR's ABM treaty violations since the 70's and have never done much to prevent the USSR from at it's peak power in the late 80's deploying many thousands of dual use SAM's.

I have in the past posted extensively on this topic but i understand that it's quite hard to find it even if your looking and much harder if you don't know to look.



However, Soviet and Russian sources, including former Premier Alexei Kosygin and the Chief Designer of the original Moscow ABM system, confirm that: the SA-5 and SA-10 were dual purpose antiaircraft/missile systems (SAM/ABMs), and that the Hen House and LPAR radars provided the requisite battle management target tracking data. These and other sources cited in The ABM Treaty Charade are not exhaustive.

Nevertheless, CIA has not revised its position on this issue, nor have the U.S. Congress and the public been informed that the ABM Treaty was a valid contract from beginning to end.

In the late 1960s the U.S. sacrificed its 20-year technological advantage in ABM defenses on the altar of "arms control." As Russian sources now admit, the Soviet General Staff was in total control of Soviet "arms control" proposals and negotiations, subject to Politburo review, which was largely pro forma. The Soviet military's objective was to gain as much advantage as possible from "arms control" agreements (SALT).

www.jinsa.org...



Russia inherited most of the Soviet empire's illegal national ABM defenses. Although the Hen Houses and LPARs located in the successor states created significant gaps in coverage, Russia still controls 12 or 13 of those radars. Consequently, SAM/ABMs still defend most of the Russian Federation from U.S. ICBMs, much of the SLBM threat, and Chinese missiles. Scheduled completion of the LPAR in Belorus will restore complete threat coverage, except for the gap left by the dismantled Krasnoyarsk LPAR. Granted, the Hen Houses are old, but the United States has been operating similar radars for 40 years.

Despite its economic difficulties, Russia continued development and production of the SA-10, adding (in 1992-1993 and 1997) two models with new missiles and electronics and replacing more than 1000 SA-5 missiles with late model SA-10s having greatly improved performance against ballistic missiles of all ranges. Russia is protected by as at least as many (about 8500) SAM/ABMs as in 1991, and they are more effective. No wonder Russia shows little concern for its proliferation of missile and nuclear technology.

Even more impressively, Russia has begun flight-testing the fourth generation "S-400" ("Triumph") SAM/ABM designed not only to end the "absolute superiority" of air assault demonstrated by the United States in the 1992 Gulf War and the 1999 Kosovo operation, but also to improve Russia's illegal ABM defenses against strategic ballistic missiles. The S-400 is scheduled to begin deployment in 2000, more testimony to Russia's commitment to maintaining its national ABM defenses in violation of the ABM Treaty.

www.security-policy.org...



Mr. Lee's analysis is complex. To vastly simplify, he says he has evidence that Russia's surface-to-air interceptor missiles carry nuclear warheads and therefore are capable of bringing down long-range ballistic missiles, not just aircraft and shorter-range missiles, which is their stated purpose. Russia has 8,000 of these missiles scattered around the country, and Mr. Lee says he has found numerous Russian sources that describe how successive generations of SAMs were in fact designed with the express intention of shooting down ballistic missiles, which is illegal under the treaty.

www.opinionjournal.com...



SA-10 GRUMBLE (S-300P/PMU - 1/2/3, 5V55, 48N6, 9M96E2)
1,800 missiles per year, 10,000 by 1990, still in production

www.aeronautics.ru...



The missile troops are equipped with about 150 SA-2 Guideline, 100 SA-3 Goa, 500 SA-5 Gammon, and 1,750 SA-10 Grumble missile launchers. A program to replace all of the older systems with the SA-10, well under way by 1996, has been considered by experts to be one of the most successful reequipment programs of the post-Soviet armed forces. Seven of the military districts have at least one aviation air defense regiment each; two districts, Moscow and the Far Eastern, have specially designated air defense districts.

The borders of the Moscow Air Defense District are the same as those of the Moscow Military District. The Far Eastern Air Defense District combines the territory of the Far Eastern Military District and the Transbaikal Military District. Presumably, the boundaries of the other military districts are the same for air defense as for other defense designations.

Data as of July 1996

www.country-data.com...


So if some Russian leaders are all excited about this it's not because their 'affraid' ( they have very deeply buried bunkers and are not in the least worried) but because the possibility exists that their advantage declines by a small margin. This is a very useful propaganda victory as well as while the US national security state seems very belligerent the Russians seem like the victims who are being forced into a 'corner' . You would think it would make sense for Bush and CO to acknowledge the fact that Russia is better prepared for world war three, imagine how much they can increase the pentagon budget by, but since the Russian lead in ABM deployment is STILL being kept secret all seems to be going according to Russian plans as per Anatoliy Golitsyn predictions. Yes, it's unbelievable, i know.

Stellar

[edit on 16-8-2008 by StellarX]

[edit on 16-8-2008 by StellarX]



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 08:22 AM
link   
The Russians are threatening to Nuke Poland.

See Link

www.thesun.co.uk...



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 11:14 AM
link   
I wonder if this will ever turn into an economic battle. We see weakness in the US already economicaly.
I remember after WWII when the Japanese were humbled and brought to its knee's they realised they could not fight America on the battle field with guns at home. But if it were possible the way to bring down the eagle was through other means and we could see posturing of that in the world of economics. I mean if you remove the capability of the US to support economicaly these installed defense systems its like they were never installed in the first place. What are your thoughts? Anyone.



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 11:21 AM
link   
reply to post by Nivek Serca
 


I dunno, but you say it like you really want it to happen.

I don't agree with the US putting missile systems near Russia, but collapsing the worlds economy can't be the best solution for it.



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 02:59 PM
link   
reply to post by malganis
 


If you think this is being done without the approval of Europeans, you're mistaken. It's not just the US, although the US is certainly leading the charge.

But if there weren't powerful factions in Europe that wanted to see this new Cold War happen, it wouldn't be happening.



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 03:36 PM
link   
Hello, I’m from Poland. In fact If you ask me how we feel about this, if we afraid of Russia I would say NO. We have nothing to afraid from Russia and it doesn’t depend on that we have missiles shield or not. The reason is clear. Russia would not risk the war with NATO. Russia would not even risk the war with only Poland (if we hadn’t been in NATO). But if they would… who cares. When the nukes starts faying over my had it would be the end of the world to all human kind. Even if only US missals hits the targets in Russia and they couldn’t react, the accumulation of radioactive material in the air would spread over the globe and temperature rise few degrees which melt polar ice. So in my opinion the scenario that Russia start the WWIII by attacking Poland is rather political fiction.
And one more argument and the most important about that threat of some Russian Generals made is just talking. They said that they direct their missiles to our country. In fact they already done this few years ago when we step into the NATO. One more potential target on our territory doesn’t make much difference to them. The consequences of that missals shield is that some Russian guy have to put in the computer program one more coordinate to their missal which would never be fired.
If I have to guess how the WWIII could start I could said that for sure not by Russian attack on Poland. The most probably they starts if they attack Ukraine. In that situation Poland engage the war to help Ukraine. Maybe Russia have 140 million of citizens but Poland with Ukraine have 100 million citizens so the forces could be equal. The problem is that Russia afraid that Ukraine want to join the NATO. After that it would be too late for them. To avoid the other conflicts with Russia we should invite Ukraine and Georgia to NATO as fast as possible so the Russia could do nothing in the future.


[edit on 16-8-2008 by odyseusz]



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 04:02 PM
link   
The U.S are acting like total hyprocrites regarding this entire Russian Invasion. I belive Miss Rice has quoted 'In the 21st century. Nations don't invade other nations.' Golly Gee! Thank you Bush Administration, your war in Iraq is totally legal since Iraq isn't 'nation' "Scariscam"

The U.S goverment thinks they own the world because of there military power, While they hold a lot of infulence in the world. They don't run the place. So, Why should they freak out over Russia putting missles on Cuba? They put there missles on Poland, So Russia should be entitled to the same freedoms.

Just because the American goverment thinks they're number one they think they can run the earth, Every Nation submiting themselves to the 'great' American empire. The America goverment better stop policing and bullying the world or the next great world empire to fall will be the American Empire.



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 04:09 PM
link   
Aaa, I forgot about something. You want the explanation of the background of that situation. The explanation is very simple. Putin (the guy who holds all the ropes to the marionette president of Russia) wants to have absolute authority in Russia and he wants to hold this power for long time like all dictators. The only way he could hold such power for a long time is to antagonize with western world so Russians citizens feel that he is the only one who could lid them in that unfriendly world. Putin convinced most of his nation that only Russian are good and the rest are unfriendly to them. Russian aren’t a pragmatic nations like western world. They could be manipulated much easier because they reacts in emotional way. I’m afraid that Republicans are learning from Putin how to manipulate the people. That way of politic is just what they want. The neo cold war would help people in Russia to forget about that they are poor and help forget American that they have serious economic crisis.

[edit on 16-8-2008 by odyseusz]



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 04:28 PM
link   
Well, there must be a conspiracy afoot, because...


s80.photobucket.com...


Originally posted by Neon Haze

Originally posted by kaspermartyrphantom

ACTUALLY...

Mine was posted on this date: posted on 14-8-2008 @ 07:00 PM
Yours was posted on this date: posted on 15-8-2008 @ 06:30 AM

So there Poindexter. Next time, follow the link and check before you let your fingers make an idiot of you.




Hmmm... Ohhhh Really?? (Said as Ace Ventura would have said it)

Your thread started was posted on 15-8-2008 @ 1:00

U.S., Poland sign missile shield deal



But this thread was already in existence for 30 minutes...

This thread started was posted on 15-8-2008 @ 12:30

Russia: Poland risks attack because of US missiles



This thread was not started by me it was started by Daedalus24

So before you attempt to divert a successful thread make sure you get your facts straight.

I know it is annoying when people start similar threads close together but that's because so many likeminded people frequent ATS... Surely that's what makes ATS so great.

I might also warn you that if you call people idiots here you will be warned by the Mods. If you disagree with someone that's fine, but personal attacks are frowned upon.

All the best,

NeoN HaZe


[edit on 16-8-2008 by kaspermartyrphantom]



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 05:10 PM
link   
reply to post by odyseusz
 



Hello, I’m from Poland. In fact If you ask me how we feel about this


Thank you, that is what this site is all about, the Truth, to deny ignorance!

It is only by knowing how people feel, experience and observe these situations, from both sides, and share that is anyone able to understand the situation or find the truth within it!


And one more argument and the most important about that threat of some Russian Generals made is just talking. They said that they direct their missiles to our country. In fact they already done this few years ago when we step into the NATO.


This is correct and your people and country have suffered terribly at the hands of the Russian/Soviet Government and of course other major powers in Europe. However I am more concerned than yourself, and I don't mean to scare you, but for the first time in a generation they threatened "nuclear" actions.

Now I don't believe this is at Poland only but a threat that is now not veiled but open. You are right in your belief IMHO that indeed any such use of weapons would occur just outside Europe first.

However I don't think anyone is stupid enough to believe in the "Limited nuclear exchange" scenario, so Europe and indeed most of the world would suffer Nuclear Attacks.

If you do believe in the "Limited Nuclear Exchange" Scenario, and are willing to promote it, well, there is a guy by the name of Comic Ali or more correctly the ex Iraqi Information Minister Muhammed Saeed al-Saha


loved that guy!

Anyhow if you truly believe that a limited exchange, without a resultant, even if months later, proliferation of use is a feasability, Or believe that in an all out nuclear war, if say only a hundred or so missiles got the US or Russia, and civilization would survive, well im sorry but you have been badly informed.

There are a multitude of reasons for that;
Environmental, psychological, sociological, and they would all have a profound affect on our ability to survive.

Just one, one effect in one category Psychological... stress is the bigger killer in the world! think on that! How stressed would we all be after a nuclear war?

That is not aimed at you odyseusz, its just a general observation!


The problem is that Russia afraid that Ukraine want to join the NATO. After that it would be too late for them. To avoid the other conflicts with Russia we should invite Ukraine and Georgia to NATO as fast as possible so the Russia could do nothing in the future.


Certainly I think your right there in saying that Russia fears the former soviet states joining NATO, and the NATO expansion generally.

I feel that Georgia will have to wait a while now before being invited to join NATO, and any move on Ukraines part would result in similar Russian reaction to the Georgia Situation.

Personally if the option to join the EU was there for them esp Ukraine it would be a more diplomatic solution, and offer some limited protection, certainly massive political backing, and less confrontational than NATO.
But alas the European Traety does not allow it.

I am though no fan of NATO or the EU, I see them for what they are! just analysing what is best in our reality.

On your last statement I think the events of 9/11 and subsequent "pre emptive" action means that we can never be sure again that they, whoever they are "could do nothing" against any of us.

I value your contribution much, tell us please how are people feeling in Poland generally, is this situation in Georgia, or the Missile Shield being talked about most?

Have you seen any change in the military presence?

Is there anger at the Russians? for the recent comments and also things in the past?

If you had to say which country in the world is most disliked in Poland is it the US or Russia, or someone else?

Would you, yourself be prepared to go and fight in defense of Ukraine? if Poland was not under attack itself?

The above question, what do you think most Polish Men would say to answer it?

How old are you? (if you don't mind!) male or female(again only if you don't mind)

Lastly have you noticed a difference in Russian visitors to your country over recent years? do you sense anger from them? would you feel welcome visiting Russia?

Much appreciated, thanks for helping us to learn!!

Kind Regards,

Elf

[edit on 16-8-2008 by MischeviousElf]

[edit on 16-8-2008 by MischeviousElf]



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 05:22 PM
link   
reply to post by odyseusz
 


i think this Polish guy's hit a lot of nails on the head with this post. Apart from the bits about the number of citizens in each country lol you may want to edit that



posted on Aug, 16 2008 @ 05:52 PM
link   
reply to post by SKUNK2
 


Sssooo... you agree with me, that if the U.S. could successfully lure Russia into attacking Poland over the missile shield, that it would mean severe diplomatic and military losses for Russia?

In fact, your opinion is that it would be even worse for Russia than I initially said.

I think you had no idea what I was talking about. hehe!

And yes, Russia has a technological advantage over Poland and the former Soviet countries. We could debate how modern the equipment is forever if you wanted to, but in the end Russia just has so much more stuff that it's a moot point. Nevertheless, you are still basically agreeing with my statement that Russia's technology wouldn't help it in such a situation. You're only disagreeing on the "why," which is a minor detail in the grand scheme of things.



new topics

top topics



 
18
<< 3  4  5    7  8 >>

log in

join