Nato chief proposes missile shield to include Russia

Nato chief proposes missile shield to include Russia

news.bbc.co.uk

Nato chief Anders Fogh Rasmussen has called for a new missile defence system that would protect the US and its allies, and include Russia as well.

Mr Rasmussen said the threat of missile proliferation was real and growing and, in cases such as Iran, these missiles could threaten Nato territories.

He said missile defence could bring Nato and Russia together.

Mr Rasmussen was speaking at the Brussels Forum - an international gathering in the Belgian capital.

(visit the link for the full news article)

Wow, this is a change. NATO + Russia? I thought the two didn't really get along... Remember Ukraine and how they wanted to be a part of NATO for a while... Russia wasn't too happy about that!!

I wonder how the Russians will respond to this. Will they reject this idea again? Will they risk their relations with Iran and China?

Keeping the peace,

Magnum

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

One thing that needs to be pointed out , if Russia is in NATO and Russia then attacks another NATO country then the NATO all for one rule is tossed out the window . It would no longer be an all for one situation .

EDIT to add , if I am not mistaken Russia already has , and has had for some time now , an anti ballistic missile defense system protecting Moscow .



[edit on 28-3-2010 by Max_TO]

reply to post by Max_TO


Russia would never, ever join NATO, so that shouldn't be a problem. As far as cooperation with them? I even doubt they'd want to do that. And I'd be afraid of them stealing Western technology if we set up some ABM shields within their territory. I doubt this plan will get anywhere.

reply to post by Nicodeme


Good point you rase . Having said that I can't help but think Russia in NATO could just happen for the very reason that I pointed out in my original post .

It would seem that it is the crazy thing that tends to happen , not the predictable .

We should of built the shield with them in the first place.

In fact we should be doing training exercises with them.

After 9-11, we had a chance for a great alliance. Stressing the word had.

I had it on good authority that the Russian ABM system was mothballed back in the mid 1990s. I don't believe they ever acknowledged this, and I'm not sure they would ever. Whatever the case, those in intelligence circles didn't believe the system had any real ability to stop an incoming attack, and only over Moscow. I had heard rumors of an "improved" system that was in operation from a few years before the USSR collapsed. The new system supposedly involved detonating some of their own ICBMs above Moscow, a few miles into space. Incoming US missiles would be destroyed or disrupted by the explosions and the EMPs. The big drawback to this plan was that while Moscow would be safe from the radiation and shock waves of their own explosions, the EMPs would still reach ground and disrupt C+C. I'm not sure how much I believe there was such a new system, but I'm pretty sure the old system was absolutely useless.

John

reply to post by Magnum007


An interesting if not workable idea . The Bear is more interested in playing Cold War era politics in order to make the US look bad . Public opinion was unwisely against Missile Defence in the likes of Poland where it would be stationed . NATO has other bigger problems to deal with after all it expanded and now won't defend the countries in Eastern Europe from Russian incursions .

Cheers xpert11 .

I think that Russia and NATO should work together. In fact, Russia should be invited to join NATO.

Russia sees itself as a European nation, therefore it should join NATO. Russia is no longer a military threat to NATO countries. I would far rather trust the Russians than the Israelis anyday.

On a slightly different tack: If Russia were to join NATO, then it would really put the mockers on the UN Security Council as 4 of the 5 permanent members would be allies ....... Interesting.

If Russian were to join NATO I believe that the balance would be much better in that group. NATO would have the UK, who just said they would not be influenced by the US anymore in it which would make a more powerful rally against hasten warmongering on the part of the US (cue Iraq memory).

It would balance things out a little more... Also I don't believe that the fact that 4/5 would be NATO allies is important, the US already monopolizes the system and does what it wants without approval from the UN (cue Iraq again)...

Magnum