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 threatens nuclear build-up over U.S. missile shield

page: 2
8
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 18 2011 @ 10:31 AM
link   
reply to post by wedidgothacked
 


Thanks for the stats! That is quite a few. I knew it was estimated in the thousands. Good to see some kind of numbers. Again it is merely estimates, because no poker player is going to show their hands to the opposition.




posted on May, 18 2011 @ 10:48 AM
link   
Ughhh so tired of this whole, WHO'S GOT THE BIGGER *ahem* MEMBER?! nonsense...
America needs to 'put it away' and other countries need to STFU and stop antagonizing America.
So simple, yet so difficult


Reminds me of this:





posted on May, 18 2011 @ 10:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by ltinycdancerg
and other countries need to STFU and stop antagonizing America.



It is America that is antagonizing others.

If American stayed IN America, there would be no problem, as I stated earlier, how many countires has America got a finger in? Bases, Installations, Nukes stored.

On the other side of the coin, how many bases, installations and nukes has other countries got in America?

There's your answer.

Quit thinking the world revolves around America and America is the poor wee victim.

Oh your defending America, good go do it INSIDE America.

Oh they "would" attack us so we attacked them first.

Thick idiots. American's are nothing more than Mr Bully no mates.
edit on 18-5-2011 by zookey because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 18 2011 @ 11:06 AM
link   
reply to post by zookey
 





i agree

if you dont like america or what it does then you are against it and un-patriotic

(contains bad language)



lol sounds pretty valid in this thread

CMON PEOPLE

its all BS, globalists dont care if we die or how we die they just want the MONEY





edit on 18-5-2011 by wedidgothacked because: (no reason given)

edit on 18-5-2011 by wedidgothacked because: typo's



posted on May, 18 2011 @ 11:26 AM
link   
The US has been very aggressive lately in world affairs especially having to do with Oil interests. This is pissing off a lot of countries including China, India and Russia. Bribery, Economic pressure, financing of parties in elections and preemptive attacks have become the methods used.



posted on May, 18 2011 @ 11:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by Chewingonmushrooms
The US has been very aggressive lately in world affairs especially having to do with Oil interests. This is pissing off a lot of countries including China, India and Russia. Bribery, Economic pressure, financing of parties in elections and preemptive attacks have become the methods used.


America pissing off other countries is NOT a NEW and RECENT thing.

They've been doing it for decades.



posted on May, 18 2011 @ 11:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by zookey

Originally posted by Chewingonmushrooms
The US has been very aggressive lately in world affairs especially having to do with Oil interests. This is pissing off a lot of countries including China, India and Russia. Bribery, Economic pressure, financing of parties in elections and preemptive attacks have become the methods used.


America pissing off other countries is NOT a NEW and RECENT thing.

They've been doing it for decades.


Never said it was a new thing, just more aggressive than usual.



posted on May, 18 2011 @ 11:44 AM
link   
all america seems to be doing,is isolating themselfs from the rest of the world.

and russia should have cause for concern,america won't give a straight answer,over a important matter.

reply to post by Jakes51
 




I knew the Russians would find any excuse what so ever to ditch agreement.


are you for real....how can russia agree to any deals,when america pointing a loaded gun at them.

do you really think,russia will bow down to america,if you do,your in for a shock.

trust me,this is a polite warning to america from medvedev.



When has the Russians ever played nice on the international stage?


and when has america ...i understand your american,and you love your country,and feel you must support your country,and govenment blindly....but what would america be like,if it was the other way round ?

there is no reason,or excuse for america to do this.

if russia was building massive defense systems on america's doorstep...and america asked russia,was it pointing them at the US,but russia refused to give america a straight answer...

were be at war already,and you know it.


and the new cold war started when NATO lied to russia over libya,and then started talking about,intervening in Syria,were russia holds a massive navy base,giving them dominance in the med,which has always bothered america.

personally,i think,america been trying to push russian buttons for a while now.



posted on May, 18 2011 @ 12:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by caladonea

1) I wonder is Russia looking for an excuse to distance itself from America.....

2) I also wonder is Russia really in league with China and the Middle East....and will all their missiles be pointed at us?


edit on 18-5-2011 by caladonea because: To correct a word



1) Russia doesn't need an excuse to distance itself. It was never in league with the USA and never will be, lightly said.

2) Yes, to say it bluntly. It's called the SCO ( Shanghai Cooperation Organization) and it's been around since '96.
The SCO was no doubt created to counter NATO.


I've seen tribute videos to both and it looks interesting. I'm not sure if its allowed to link to another website here but this is where I saw the videos. And I don't want to go searching through Youtube for them.

Here's a link to a tribute video to the NATO www.liveleak.com...

And Here's a link to a tribute video to the SCO www.liveleak.com...

Enjoy.



posted on May, 18 2011 @ 12:19 PM
link   



1) Russia doesn't need an excuse to distance itself. It was never in league with the USA and never will be, lightly said.



All those years they spent in space
All that technology that is cheaper to make and more reliable and doesn't rely on flashy lights and gizmos and 1000 patents still working and easy to repair.

Yup, definatly not in the same league.

Way ahead of you.


edit on 18-5-2011 by zookey because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 18 2011 @ 12:45 PM
link   
Its a defensive platform, not offenseive. Since the US withdrew from the ABM treaty, that means Russia is allowed to build their own missile defense shield.

I say push forward in building it, and let the RUssians whine to themselves.



posted on May, 18 2011 @ 04:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Xcathdra
Its a defensive platform, not offenseive. Since the US withdrew from the ABM treaty, that means Russia is allowed to build their own missile defense shield.

I say push forward in building it, and let the RUssians whine to themselves.


American Defensive platforms sit inside America to protect America, not in other countries.


edit on 18-5-2011 by zookey because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 18 2011 @ 05:38 PM
link   
reply to post by TheMaverick
 


The US may very well be isolating itself from the world as you say? However, I think the isolation is self imposed by poor economic policy and fiscal chaos by government. That to me is the cause for some of the isolation that you are referring to. The missile defense system was out of the news for a long while, and then all of a sudden it becomes a hot button issue again? Keep in mind there is a presidential election taking place in Russia next year. This could be a play by the Russian president to please the hawks who still have anxiety toward the west. As far as the US not being above board about the missile defense system? They have been steadfast about it's intention, and have gone on the record countless times to reassure Russia that it is not against them. Once again, the US has made a statement to alleviate some of the concerns by the Russians.

US says missile shield in Europe not directed at Russia


"We have been consistent and clear for many years now that our missile defense cooperation in no way is directed at Russia," State Department spokesman Mark Toner told reporters.

"And in fact we want to cooperate on missile defense with Russia and we have been quite clear on that," Toner added.


My nationality or politics has nothing to do with this argument, and I am calling this little diplomatic tit for tat for what it is. It is huffing and puffing by Russia over an issue that was no legitimate threat to them or the strategic balance. Their missiles can still strike every US city in a MAD scenario. This is not like when Reagan deployed Pershing II missile platforms through NATO in West Germany during the eighties or the Cuban missile crisis that happened earlier. As far as I see it, this platform is nothing more than a defensive tool. I think the Russian argument is merely rhetoric and pulling threats out of thin air? Maybe I am wrong, but that is how see it as a result of the information being presented. Thanks for the reply, and very poignant points!
edit on 18-5-2011 by Jakes51 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 18 2011 @ 06:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Fox Molder
Oh them Russians I tell ya ! Ever since Gorbachev and Reagan became friends and took down the U.S.S.R., the extreme wright in Russia have been looking for a way and reason to stand up again. This seems to have lit up a very old flame and can soon escapade to a 5 bell fire!


clearly you dont know the full the story it was Gorbachev betrayed the USSR, and sell it out for money, and where is Gorbachev the traitor? well his spending his time in Germany celebrating his 80s and 90s birthdays.

The ones who are provoking russia, are the UN,NATO and the american government puppet states in eupore.
amercia just cant wait to place there flag in Moscow while burns.



posted on May, 18 2011 @ 06:11 PM
link   
well you know jake if we try and look at the bigger picture here,america builds these NMD's which throws a lopsided balance in military power,forcing russia to build one,and the arms race begins.

it also makes the strategic arms reduction treaty pointless.



posted on May, 18 2011 @ 07:07 PM
link   
russia..again...cold war..ok



posted on May, 18 2011 @ 09:19 PM
link   
The START treaty and any attempt to place restrictions on ICBM technology is not going to be very effective unless there is an ABM treaty paired with it, which would restrict such actions as placing ABM installations near the border of other countries far away from your own territory.

The theory of the ABM treaty is that is that if one side has considerably more potent ABM capabilities, which can in effect largely render the opposing side's nuclear missiles obsolete, that side can be somewhat assured of survivability in a nuclear exchange. In that case Mutually Assured Destruction no longer applies, and the side with ABM advantage may have a bigger incentive to use nuclear weapons and stage a first strike. So in summary one side's ICBM could be far more strategically dangerous and effective than the other side's, although this wouldn't be due to ICBM technology but ABM technology.

ABM Treaty


There was an ABM treaty paired with START treaty during the Cold War, but the US scrapped it in 2001, despite Russia's protests. This allowed the US to pursue the current strategy to install radars and ABM missiles in Eastern Europe. So the US started this new charade paving the way towards a new arms race, and Russia's actions are pretty much reactionary. Russia has warned the US for many years, that the result of scrapping the ABM Treaty is that START will go the same route, and that Russia will be forced to develop ICBM advancements to overcome US' new ABM countermeasures.

All this will result in is both sides spending a ton of money to get to back to status quo. Well, if that is what the US wants - to bleed more money that the Federal Government doesn't actually have, then so be it. Russia can afford it, as their Federal Budget has had consistent surplus as opposed to deficit, and their energy and resource exports are bringing windfall revenues.



The way to avoid a new arms race, is to reinstate the ABM treaty. If the US is so concerned about Iran (which does not actually have ICBMs capable of reaching Europe or US), they can accept the deal that Russia offered to jointly operate the Radar installations in Azerbaijan, and if needed place join ABM installations there.



posted on May, 18 2011 @ 09:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Xcathdra
Its a defensive platform, not offenseive. Since the US withdrew from the ABM treaty, that means Russia is allowed to build their own missile defense shield.


It is a defensive platform which is key factor in the nuclears arms strategy, and could at least partially render the opposing side's nuclear forces (and nuclear deterrent with MAD in mind) useless. And if the US withdrew from the ABM treaty, Russia can just as well withdraw from the START treaty.

Do you really want to see who can outspend each other? Remind us as to the status of the US Federal Budget deficits at the moment?



posted on May, 18 2011 @ 10:02 PM
link   
reply to post by maloy
 


We withdrew from the ABM treaty about 5 years ago. The ABM treaty actually allowed for a missile defense shield, but was restricted to just Moscow and Washington DC. The US did not build one, and at the time the Soviets did.

As for some other posters, its a defensive platform, since its designed to shoot down incoming missile. The countries that are participating are also covered under the defense shield, and since they are sovereign nations, they can make their own choices in that realm. The defense shield is not designed to deal with incoming missiles in large numbers, as the Russians can do.

Its designed for limited protection, namely North Korea who has a balisitic missile that can reach parts of the US (Alaska and Hawaii - People seem to forget about those 2 states).

The new treaty deals with reduction in nuclear stockpiles. One of the issues we had was the Russian research into new delivery platforms. Those endeavors have allowed Russia to develop a new type of missile that the defense shield would not be able counter. Its also not designed to defend against MERVs either.



posted on May, 18 2011 @ 10:59 PM
link   
reply to post by zookey
 


For the record,
I was being SARCASTIC lol
I agree with you



new topics

top topics



 
8
<< 1   >>

log in

join