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.

 

Ukraine offers West radar warning

page: 2
5
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 06:48 AM
link   
I don’t think they have a choice. They have to do everything to joint to the democratic and economically independent part of Europe. Other way they become such country like Belarus with their marionette dictator Lukashenka, primitive economy, no investments and generally very low level of life like in every country which are Russian puppets. Ukrainians don’t want such future so they have no choice as I said.

And what is interesting Ukraine have very advanced radars which allowed to detect stealth planes.

[edit on 17-8-2008 by odyseusz]




posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 02:37 PM
link   
Why is Moscow worried about this?

If Russia were to lanuch a nuclear attack the missile would go north or north west, or east, to reach America (the quickest way). But if Iran were to lanuch a nuclear missile at America, which from what people have said they dont have the technology yet, but if they could, the missile would go over Poland and Ukraine (again the quikest way)

It looks to me like the missile defence systems in the ukraine and poland are for if an Iranian strike and not a russian one.



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 03:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by sheepy ALEX
Why is Moscow worried about this?

If Russia were to lanuch a nuclear attack the missile would go north or north west, or east, to reach America (the quickest way). But if Iran were to lanuch a nuclear missile at America, which from what people have said they dont have the technology yet, but if they could, the missile would go over Poland and Ukraine (again the quikest way)

It looks to me like the missile defence systems in the ukraine and poland are for if an Iranian strike and not a russian one.


But the Iranians, although they are planning on pursuing them, don't yet have any functional nuclear warheads.
Iran is no more threat currently, than Iraq was during desert storm launching scuds at Israel.
The missile shields are clearly to protect against Russian missiles.
They always were.
Where does China fit in on all this?
They have functioning nukes.
They are busy having there happy little Olympics.
But what after thats over?



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 03:53 PM
link   
reply to post by sheepy ALEX
 

You seemed to have forgotten that the EU is also a target of Russian missiles, hence put interceptors in Poland to reduce EU target damage after the initial US first strike.

The Rise of U.S. Nuclear Primacy CFR

First Strike against Russia: The Real Danger behind US ABM Deployment in Eastern Europe. Global Research



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 04:02 PM
link   
I don't think georgia or ukraine are the issue. Of course they want American protection. Cuba wanted USSR protection and that incident almost started a Nuclear War. Somehow we have convinced ourselves that it's ok for us to do the very same thing to them. Hypocrites!

If WE don't intend a Nuclear First Strike, then Russia should be supplied ABM bases on the North, South, East, and West borders and coast of the US. What's good for us should be ok for them.



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 04:54 PM
link   
reply to post by HimWhoHathAnEar
 


Here's a video from RealNews on the issue:
Russian General threatens Poland over missile deal


Russia knows the ABM is aimed against them and Poland's agreement to become armed with ABMs was spurred by the Georgian conflict, not Iran.



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 04:56 PM
link   
Let's not forget that Ukraine, presumably, still have a couple of nukes.


After the disintegration of the USSR, Ukraine found itself in possession of the world's third largest nuclear arsenal. There were 176 launchers of intercontinental ballistic missiles with some 1,240 warheads on Ukrainian territory. This force consisted of 130 SS-19s, each capable of delivering six nuclear weapons, and 46 SS-24s, each armed with ten nuclear weapons. An additional 14 SS-24 missiles were present in Ukraine, but not operationally deployed with warheads. Several dozen bombers with strategic nuclear capabilities were armed with some 600 air-launched missiles, along with gravity bombs. In addition, as many as 3,000 tactical nuclear weapons rounded out an arsenal totalling approximately 5,000 strategic and tactical weapons...

... However, in conformity with the 16 July 1990 "Declaration of State Sovereignty" and other agreements signed at the creation of the CIS, by May 1992 Ukraine voluntarily removed all tactical nuclear weapons [approximately 3000] inherited from the former Soviet Union.


According to the above quote from fas.org approximately 3000 tactical nukes have been removed but where are the strategic nukes? If Ukraine has them, will those nukes be used in the event of a Russian attack/invasion?



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 05:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Regenmacher
 


Great video. Pretty much spells it out. I thought the part about how Russia went so far as to offer an ABM radar in Azerbaijan to watch Iran was an eye opener. Bushco turned em down. Proving that the ABM's are all about Russia.



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 05:12 PM
link   
possibly related:


Russia is considering arming its Baltic fleet with nuclear warheads for the first time since the cold war, senior military sources warned last night.


Times Online

Hopefully the parties concerned will see the futility of pursuing aggressive courses of action and try to make things work through diplomatic means or, heaven forbid, we might be seeing mushrooms aglow over Europe one of these days.



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 05:48 PM
link   
I understand that since Iran now had launched a rocket into space with a dummy satelite Russia now sees a threat that the US sees. They will allow the radar installations and like Poland they will be allowed to inspect them. Russia , I believe, knows that any new wars, and hopefully there will not be any, will not be on land but by air. Therefore they do not need a buffer zone. At least that is how I see it.



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 05:55 PM
link   
reply to post by Interestinggg
 


My point is the quickest way from Russia to America is to go north and over the north pole, so surely they are'nt intended for Russian missiles?

Who knows, i am just using logical thinking



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 06:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Regenmacher
 


If the EU is a target of Russian missiles, which it probabally will be, why would the US want to put their missile interceptors in Poland and the Ukraine, I know most EU countries are allies with the US, but why would the US want to spend, possibly milllions, of Us citizens tax payers dollars on defending Europe?



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 07:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by sheepy ALEX
reply to post by Regenmacher
 


If the EU is a target of Russian missiles, which it probabally will be, why would the US want to put their missile interceptors in Poland and the Ukraine, I know most EU countries are allies with the US, but why would the US want to spend, possibly milllions, of Us citizens tax payers dollars on defending Europe?

Because if Russia can control the military of any countries they'd occupy that's just a bigger force for the US to fear



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 07:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by sheepy ALEX
If the EU is a target of Russian missiles, which it probabally will be....


There's no will be...UK and France have had nuclear weapons since the late 50s. You think they all are pointing at themselves? come on...lol

[edit on 17-8-2008 by Regenmacher]



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1   >>

log in

join