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 to move missiles to Baltic

page: 1
3
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 07:31 AM
link   

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)




posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 07:31 AM
link   
So Russia has now decided to fight fire with fire.

It will be interesting to see the US reaction to this news, as Russia continues to play the US game of brinkmanship and oneupmanship, and defends its territory against what they see as a direct threat from the US.

The US has been scaremongering in Europe by trying to say that Iranian missiles could reach there and that the missile defences are a protective measure - something no-one with half a brain would believe.

As I've said before, this is about pressure - Russia does a LOT of business with Iran, and that country seems to be the next one on the agenda in the battale for control of resources.

I think the US is playing a dangerous game - you can't rattle sabres in the backyard of russia and not expect a reaction.

This is a owrrying escalation of events, but one that was always going to happen in what is fast becoming a game of VERY high stakes.

news.bbc.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 07:46 AM
link   
cool ,Russia is telling the USA to get lost or its azz will get kicked



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 07:50 AM
link   
Some more from Medvedev, from a New York Times article:

“We earlier planned to take three missile regiments within the missile division stationed in Kozelsk off combat duty and discontinue the division itself by 2010. I have decided to refrain from these plans,” Mr. Medvedev said.

“The Iskander missile system will be deployed in Kaliningrad region to neutralize, when necessary, the missile shield,” Medvedev said.

“Radioelectronic equipment located in the western region” of Russia in the Kaliningrad region “will jam objects of the U.S. missile defense system,” Mr. Medvedev said.

“These are forced measures,” Mr. Medvedev said. “We have told our partners more than once that we want positive cooperation, we want to act together to combat common threats, that we want to act together. But they, unfortunately, don’t want to listen to us.”

source



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 08:01 AM
link   
Does not seem like big news at all. If the Us missile shield is for defence against rogue nations then it poses no threat to Russia and there will be no reason for Russia to attack the site. Its a completely balanced reaction to the US missile-shield move.

And I disagree with the person who said that this move is 'leave or we will shoot you'. It is a 'attack us and we can defend ourselves'.



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 08:03 AM
link   
reply to post by Alphard
 


And so it begins...

Certainly a message well timed by the Russians.



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 08:14 AM
link   
Its just Ivan on the move again, with yet another symbolic gesture.

I think the truth is that nuclear weapons have in the past, and will in the future prevent any extensive between the USA and Russia.

This may be intimidating to the smaller former satellite states of the USSR though. Ukraine in particular will be wary of this move.



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 08:14 AM
link   
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



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 08:41 AM
link   
reply to post by Terrapop
 


I couldn't have said it better.

It begins, indeed...



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 09:27 AM
link   
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.



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 10:35 AM
link   
reply to post by budski
 


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



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 10:47 AM
link   
reply to post by deltaboy
 


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



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 11:07 AM
link   
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.



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 11:07 AM
link   
Poland and Czech Republic wanted to be part of the missile defense shield. It was a request. Not force upon by invading. Russia on the other hand its pointing missiles at them.



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 11:12 AM
link   
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. So now Russia puts missiles near several EU members. Bad move as far as big picture goes, good one for small minded politicians and revenge attitudes. If Russia will side with China - it will be powerfull union. Until China will digest Russia. Russia never fell to Western forces, but did to Eastern one. Bad choice, another small step toward cold war2.



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 11:15 AM
link   

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



They don't want to be bullied? They have no choice - and no one to blame but themselves. In the 90's they were neutral, and Russia did not bully them or consider bullying them in any way. Now they want to play cold war games with their new buddy - U.S.? Great. But don't bitch and whine when Russia reacts with games of its own.

U.S. wants a cold war, and Poland and Czech Republic are willing to join it. Now that they realize that this isn't a game and U.S. drew Russia in, they crap themselves. Well what the hell did they expect. They should either learn to accept responsibility and continue to play with the big powers, or they should quit and remain neutral while they still can.




As for Russia not listening - did U.S. and its European allies listen to Russia when Russia warned them not to place the ABM systems there? Did they listen to Russia's concerns about NATO's expansion around Russia? Did they listen to Russia's concerns about the precedent set in Kosovo?

No - they ignored Russia completely, pretending it is not even there. Now you expect Russia to listen? Who are you kidding?



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 11:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by deltaboy
Poland and Czech Republic wanted to be part of the missile defense shield.


Great. They must have also wanted Russian missiles in Kaliningrad, because they knew that this was going to be Russia's response. No need to whine.



Originally posted by deltaboy
It was a request. Not force upon by invading.


A request by corrupt politicians funded by the West. A request that people did not uphold, and yet the politicians went ahead with it anyway.

Russia invading Afghanistan was also a request - from Afghan communist party. U.S. war in Iraq was also a request - by Bush a bunch of oil and contractor companies. Requests are great - you just have to learn to accept responsibility.



Originally posted by deltaboy
Russia on the other hand its pointing missiles at them.


They chose to play cold war games willingly - just as you said. So now they got themselves a cold war game. Why whine?



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 11:28 AM
link   

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.



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 11:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by maloy
They don't want to be bullied? They have no choice - and no one to blame but themselves. In the 90's they were neutral, and Russia did not bully them or consider bullying them in any way. Now they want to play cold war games with their new buddy - U.S.? Great. But don't bitch and whine when Russia reacts with games of its own.


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.. which is why the entire East-European block is wary of Russia now. 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.

Edit: btw I still consider the russian move of putting missiles in Kaliningrad a perfectly correct response and have no beef with that.

[edit on 5-11-2008 by Alphard]



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 11:59 AM
link   

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]



new topics

top topics



 
3
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join