Russia to move missiles to Baltic , page 1
Pages: <<  1    2    3  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 3 times
Topic started on 5-11-2008 @ 07:31 AM by budski

Russia to move missiles to Baltic


news.bbc.co.uk
Russia is to deploy new missiles in a Baltic enclave near Nato member Poland, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev says.

Short-range Iskander missiles in the Kaliningrad region would "neutralise" the planned US anti-missile shield in Poland and the Czech Republic, he said.

The US says its shield is a defence against missiles from "rogue" nations, but Moscow sees it as a direct threat.
(visit the link for the full news article)


reply posted on 5-11-2008 @ 07:46 AM by sadchild01
cool ,Russia is telling the USA to get lost or its azz will get kicked



reply posted on 5-11-2008 @ 08:03 AM by Terrapop
reply to post by Alphard



And so it begins...

Certainly a message well timed by the Russians.


reply posted on 5-11-2008 @ 08:14 AM by Breifne
reply to post by Terrapop



The message is interestingly timed - is this one of the 'tests' for Obama that has been discussed on the board?

How he reacts to this will be important in January. I suppose, where does isolationism end and protectionism begin?

B



reply posted on 5-11-2008 @ 08:41 AM by emsed1
reply to post by Terrapop



I couldn't have said it better.

It begins, indeed...


reply posted on 5-11-2008 @ 09:27 AM by budski
reply to post by Breifne



Possibly - although the war of rhetoric has been going on for some time now.

The fact that these missiles were due to be decomissioned by 2010, and that they are now not being is a clear indicator that russia intends to do her own thing and not be bullied by the west.


reply posted on 5-11-2008 @ 10:35 AM by deltaboy
reply to post by budski



Poland and Czechoslovakia doesn't want to be bullied by Russia. But Russia is not listening.


reply posted on 5-11-2008 @ 10:47 AM by Harlequin
reply to post by deltaboy



Poland and Czech republic don`t want to be bullied by the USA - but the USA arn`t listening


reply posted on 5-11-2008 @ 11:07 AM by maloy
This is all about strategy.

The U.S. knew well enough that if the ABM shield is placed near Russia against Russia's wishes, that Russia will have no choice but to respond with its own move. This is the move.

It is no longer a secret that US ABM installations in Eastern Europe are meant against Russia. They may mean little now given Russia's arsenal, but in the long-term I am sure will enhance the ABM's capabilities and increase its numbers.

The ABM is meant to neutralize Russia's ballistic missiles - and as such it is termed as being "defensive". Alright then - Russian Iskander missiles in Kaliningrad (Baltic enclave) are meant to neutralize the ABM capabilities - thus they can be termed as "defensive" or at least "counter-defensive". Whoever is suprised or appalled by this move - time to wake up. US has caused this through its own reckless actions. Don't want missiles in Kaliningrad - don't place your weapons systems in Russia's backyard.



By the way - this is no threat to US or Western Europe. So far Russia is only considering placing the Iskander systems in Kaliningrad. These are short-range missiles and not ICBMs. Their only purpose is to neutralize the ABM system in the highly unlikely event of a war. No reason to panic.


Personally I think putting a few Topol-M's in Kaliningrad wouldn't hurt either. And a couple of S400 batteries. US and its Eastern European puppets want to play idiotic military geopolitical games - Russia shouldd join in just to show them where such idiocy lead to.

And I am sure Poland and the Baltic states are just thrilled living next to Russian fortress crammed with weapons. But Poland has no one to blame but its own leaders.


reply posted on 5-11-2008 @ 11:28 AM by maloy
Originally posted by ZeroKnowledge
I think that nobody wants to bullied, doesn't mind who the bully is. From kids to countries. And in this case Russia got full right to do this, but i see it as another mistake in big political game. EU showed Russia that it is not hostile to it and will not support certain decisions by US,its position on Georgian issue was much less strict.


This ABM-contention is not about EU. Russia doesn't have a problem with EU. This is about a bunch of nationalistic fiercly pro-American governments in some Eastern European countries. I am sure Germany, France, and possibly even Britain are frowning upon the idiocy that is taking place in Eastern Europe. Yet they are not willing to step up and bring this for reconsideration in NATO.

It seems like US and Poland/Czech Republic have their own little alliance going on, somewhat separate from the rest of NATO and EU.


Originally posted by ZeroKnowledge
If Russia will side with China - it will be powerfull union.


China has not shown willingness to definitively ally with anybody at this point. They turned down Russia's proposals during the recent Georgia-Ossetia war. I don't think it is time to worry about China yet.


Originally posted by ZeroKnowledge
Russia never fell to Western forces, but did to Eastern one.


Seriously?

Are you referring to the Mongol invasions? That is about as relevant now as the Roman Empire. China does not pose a significant threat to Russia, beyond a minor to moderate geoethnical problem in SouthEast Russia. But war or conflict is out of the question.


reply posted on 5-11-2008 @ 11:59 AM by maloy
Originally posted by Alphard
This is complete nonsense.. in the 90-s Russia was under the 'rule' of Yeltsin who was pro-west and friendly towards neighbors.. or at least leaving them to themselves. There was no reason not to be neutral. However as Putin took power, Russia's stance changed to hostile..


How did Russia's stance change to "hostile"? Define hostile. Explain how Russia's stance changed to Poland and Czech Republics, and why you perceive Russia to be a threat to them. Can you back your arguement that Russia become more "hostile" with any facts.

Russia did not become more hostile. Putin's coming to power in Russia coincided with a change in leadership in Poland and other Eastern European countries too - where pro-Western nationalists came to power. Relations with Russia worsened when these nationalists started to ally close to US and adopted a anti-Russian rhetoric. There were NO HOSTILE RELATIONS on either side (and I believe there still aren't) - just worsened relations.

Worsened relations is not a reason to assume hostility and form a military alliance against Russia.


By your reasoning, France should have became a fierce Russian ally (fearing "hostility" from US) after Bush and Chiraq spared over Iraq invasion and the relations between France and U.S. soured.


Originally posted by Alphard
which is why the entire East-European block is wary of Russia now.


Why is that? People in hordes keep talking about Putin being hostile to neighbors. Yet no one bothers to look at the facts or familiarize themselves with geopolitical history of the last decade.


Originally posted by Alphard
Maloy you are an intelligent person I have seen that from your posts.. Please don't deny what you KNOW just because you want to win an argument.


Tell me what I KNOW. Or better yet tell me what you KNOW. I don't mean your opinion that Putin is hostile - I mean concrete facts as to how Putin's policies were hostile to Russia's neighbors.

What I know - is that based on my assessment and analysis of Putin's policies and Russia's actions in early 2000's, I do not see any evidence of increased hostility on the part of Russia towards its neighbors. Nor do I see any evidence that anti-Russian and pro-US sentiments among Eastern European governments arouse because of Putin. My personal conclusion is that what we are seeing resulted from a new US strategy under bush after 9-11. War on Terror, axis of evil, expansion of NATO, financing of coups in Ukraine and Georgia, and a more militaristic and proactive attitude of the US - are all factors that contributed to worsening relations between Russia and US/NATO. Did Putin's "tough stance" approach to international politics contribute to worsening antagonistic relations? Certainly. But I do not believe that his actions caused the innitial rising antagonism.

If you believe that you have facts to prove me wrong - I will gradly hear them. But concluding that Putin is hostile does not substitute for a fact.

[edit on 5-11-2008 by maloy]
Pages: <<  1    2    3  >>    ^^TOP^^



Russian scientists reach buried Antarctic Lake Vostok
  Posted 5 days ago with 83 member flags
Monsanto quits as GM results announced (EUROPE)
  Posted 7 days ago with 72 member flags
Strange noises reported around North Battleford
  Posted 18 days ago with 67 member flags
Ayatollah: Kill all Jews, annihilate Israel
  Posted 6 days ago with 49 member flags

ATS Live North America is broadcasting in 25 minutes.
Today's Show: ATS Live: 96: Super powers, Falklands Woes, Stan Deyo Interview, Syria, Telepathy, The Devils Chord.