Russia Retaliates Against US: Puts Radar Station On Combat Alert

page: 3
67
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 24 2011 @ 12:55 AM
link   
reply to post by Helious
 


Then we agree!




posted on Nov, 24 2011 @ 12:56 AM
link   
According to this statement maybe the US is trying to goad russia into supporting an attack on iran?
We take them out, no defense shield.
From the article:American officials insist that the missiles in Europe would be meant to fend off a potential threat from Iran, which is pushing forward with long-range missile and alleged nuclear arms programs.

But Russian officials say that despite Iran being a target, the shield would also be capable of intercepting Russian missiles, crippling the military parity



Read more: www.themoscowtimes.com...
The Moscow Times



posted on Nov, 24 2011 @ 01:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
In order for one to retaliate action must be taken against one first. In order for one to retaliate one must take action against the offending party. No action has been taken against Russia (or Syria for that matter). Russia is taking no action against anyone.

There is no retaliation. Just the expected sabre rattling. Not sure what short range missiles in Kaliningrad have to do with Syria though. Do you really think Russia would attack NATO countries over action in Syria? The speech has nothing to do with Syria.



Exactly!

This is no "Retaliation"

Russia moving stuff around inside their borders doesn't mean Jack Squat. They are doing it INSIDE their borders. They can move whatever the hell they damn well please inside their borders. It's their country! All during the Cold War the Russians and the US moved all kinds of hardware around. Both sides played Cat and Mouse all day everyday 24/7. It didn't mean war was immanent.

Also, this isn't about Syria!



posted on Nov, 24 2011 @ 01:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by Helious
 

The speech is not really about Syria. It is about Russia's concern over NATO's deployment of missiles in Europe. Russia's ongoing concern.
"Citizens of Russia, I address you today in connection with the situation concerning the NATO countries' missile defense system in Europe"
edit on 11/24/2011 by Phage because: (no reason given)


Dmitry Medvedev Video mark 08:18

"The Russain federation will deploy modern offensive weapons systems in the west and south of the country ensuring our ability to take out any of THE US MISSILE DEFENSE SYSTEM IN EUROPE"
edit on 24-11-2011 by JudgeDeath because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 24 2011 @ 01:23 AM
link   
Come on already? This is nothing new, and Russia has been ratcheting up the rhetoric for years now. Let them move their missile batteries to the western regions of their country. Who cares? They need to realize the Cold War ended decades ago and they no longer have sphere of influence in Europe. Go ahead and deploy the missile defense platforms in the EU, because it is none of Russia's business! No one is threatening them, and these defense platforms are a "just in case," precaution.

Historical speaking, Russia has had a long history of invading and occupying Eastern European countries, and they cannot deny that. Now, if the US/NATO was deploying state of the art tactical nukes on Russia's doorstep then they would have reason for concern. This is just the usual Russian saber rattling. They need to get on board with the program and use their influence in Iran and Syria to bring the situation under control before military action is taken. Have they done anything remotely like that recently? Not much, because Asad is still massacring his people and Iran is defiant as ever. They have no problem asking for concessions from others, but when it is their turn to give in return it is usually little to nothing. Let them talk, and put their missiles where ever they want. Who can stop them. Let them live in some misplaced world of fear and paranoia.
edit on 24-11-2011 by Jakes51 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 24 2011 @ 02:04 AM
link   
Data of potential strategic target postions is always collected and of course forwarded to the various fire control systems. Always. Even in times of peace, to be prepared for the case of war.
This is standard procedure by every military of every nation with long range missile capability.
The rest is political rhetoric.



posted on Nov, 24 2011 @ 02:19 AM
link   
Let Europe take care of it. They need to stop hiding behind the U.S. and pick on the slack on their own. Why should we defend Europe if they are capable of defending themselves? We need to stay out of this too and not asking us to install missiles what they want.



posted on Nov, 24 2011 @ 02:27 AM
link   
Wow, tons of cold-war era rhetoric in there.

"dividing lines in europe"

"re-armament"

"Nuclear deterrent"

oh joy
edit on 24-11-2011 by ClydeFrog42 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 24 2011 @ 02:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by SLAYER69

Russia moving stuff around inside their borders doesn't mean Jack Squat. They are doing it INSIDE their borders. They can move whatever the hell they damn well please inside their borders. It's their country!



But that is useful to their general argument. It would be idiotic to protest a missile shield, then retaliate by extending your own missile shield. The gesture is the same, but Russia assume the moral imperative.

The point is pretty clear: if the missile shield is completed, Russia will use force to 'un-complete' it.

I'm not so sure it will come to that, though. If so, not for some time.



posted on Nov, 24 2011 @ 03:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by ClydeFrog42
The point is pretty clear: if the missile shield is completed, Russia will use force to 'un-complete' it.


No. it isn't clear. You know that sounds scary and all. But no they wont.

They're moving what they want within their own borders. NATO is not deploying anything on their territory. So Russia has nothing to say about. They can express their displeasure, they can saber rattle, but unless they want to sign theirs and ours death warrants that's about all they'll do and they know it.


I'm not so sure it will come to that, though. If so, not for some time.


That's right. You're not sure, because if they did then it's game over for everybody. West & East and everybody else left will be breathing Nuclear fallout for the next couple of years or so which will make japan's fukushima seem like a firecracker.



posted on Nov, 24 2011 @ 03:16 AM
link   
Let's get this show on the road!



At least the music will kick butts!




edit on 24-11-2011 by Vitchilo because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 24 2011 @ 04:05 AM
link   
This scenario is as clear as day for those who pay attention. This war will be fought primarily between the US, UK and Israel V Iran, Russia and China.

This is why i created this thread that so little of you paid attention too and dismissed.

This war will be fought and it will begin before Christmas. The sad fact is, i DO NOT see the US,UK and Israel winning it.

How many citizens around the world are going to die before the US stop starting these wars?
edit on 24/11/11 by jrmcleod because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 24 2011 @ 04:38 AM
link   
First off a FEW FACTS that i have learned in my college courses (Military Operational Studies / Diplomacy) 16 credits to go before my BA.


- Most Americans / Russians will survive the Nuclear war.
- Anything over 25 Megatons will be very easily shot down.


- America should not back down to Russia under any circumstance in this. Russia has proven itself to be a rogue government with the Soviet Union and its still FRESH on people's minds. The Russian government has no right to ask us to remove our protection.
- Russia will be utterly obliterated through technological warfare. If nukes are not launched.


- The Iron Dome Complex (Which is mostly classified) is rumored to be able to stop 2000 incoming missiles from 300 miles off our coast in a single hour.

- The Star Wars program which does NOT have most of its equipment activated and in operation. It is activated and launched during a Nuclear War scenario.

There is to much information to relay that i have learned over the past 3 years.


I can tell you. America will counter any threat Russia / China presents to America , and will due so quickly and violently if Russia has the balls to strike.



posted on Nov, 24 2011 @ 05:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by milkyway12
First off a FEW FACTS that i have learned in my college courses (Military Operational Studies / Diplomacy) 16 credits to go before my BA.
- Most Americans / Russians will survive the Nuclear war.
- Anything over 25 Megatons will be very easily shot down.
I can tell you. America will counter any threat Russia / China presents to America , and will due so quickly and violently if Russia has the balls to strike.

Im sure no one wants a war and Im not taking any sides
But your college courses are focusing on conventional warfare.
If all the missile defenses are kncked out then no one can shoot down anything.
A cutting edge device can be run is a basement well within the borders of the country
and cause devastating earthquakes / and or Tunguska type of blasts, on the other side
of the world. And there is no known defense against this.



posted on Nov, 24 2011 @ 05:49 AM
link   
reply to post by milkyway12
 


I'm not going to disagree with your college course content because to be perfectly honest, i don't know enough about operational warfare. However, what i will say is that you shouldn't take everything you are taught to be 100% fact. If you can be taught these things in a college, i wonder what the Russians or Chinese know. They will have redundancies to attempt to over throw the US protection system.

The US cannot say with 100% certainty what the Russians have in space. Or indeed what the Russians or Chinese have developed to counter the US protective shields.

Only time will tell, but taking the stance the the US is indestructible is a dangerous game...the bigger they are the harder they fall.

All empires fall...given time and the US is running out of it - and quickly



posted on Nov, 24 2011 @ 05:54 AM
link   
reply to post by andy1972
 

we go into syria, then russian troops will go in. if they dont stop us first. Nato backing the us, a cocktail of demise for europe.



posted on Nov, 24 2011 @ 06:48 AM
link   
so basically any missile shield launch site in Europe launches a rocket, Russia will deem it a threat and take the rocket / site out.

Makes sense as the US and NATO are not legally explaining to Russia or involving them in it.
Therefore Russia cannot make a proper decision if it is a threat to them.

The only assurance NATO and the US has provided is verbal and 'you don't need to worry about it as its not aimed at you'.

I don't blame Russia, I really don't.
However if say Iran started firing off nukes and the defence shield in Europe was activated, Russia would perceive this as a threat and fire on the sites in Europe taking out half of Europe along with it.

So Europe is just a pawn between the USA and Russia.
Feck the American administration on this, why should Europe be wiped off the map for you ?



posted on Nov, 24 2011 @ 07:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by diddy1234
so basically any missile shield launch site in Europe launches a rocket,

Strike one.
It's a defensive system.

It would only be fired if somebody else launches one first.


Russia will deem it a threat and take the rocket / site out.


Strike two.
Well, They can try...


Makes sense


Strike three.
Well apparently it doesn't because you've completely missed how the whole system and it's functions works.



as the US and NATO are not legally explaining to Russia or involving them in it.
Therefore Russia cannot make a proper decision if it is a threat to them.


Hit the showers.
Explain who decides if it's legal or not? Why should Europe and or NATO care what Russia wants or demands? It's not their system to begin with. Russia has no say in European affairs.



posted on Nov, 24 2011 @ 07:24 AM
link   
If NATO / US involved Russia, then you could use the support of Russia as well to your advantage.

So why just have a missile defence system in Europe if you could have the defence system of Russia working on your side as well ?

Or the other alternative, is to remove the missile defence system from Europe all together as it really only benefits America (by the time we tell America who launched what and where from Europe would be a wasteland).

Lets face it, if any one launched a nuke at Europe it would be game over quite quickly.
The geographical land mass is not Russia, China or America !

As for the UK, 90% of its population is in the south of the country, one nuke and were all gone !



posted on Nov, 24 2011 @ 07:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by SLAYER69

Originally posted by diddy1234
so basically any missile shield launch site in Europe launches a rocket,

Strike one.
It's a defensive system.

It would only be fired if somebody else launches one first.


Russia will deem it a threat and take the rocket / site out.


Strike two.
Well, They can try...


Makes sense


Strike three.
Well apparently it doesn't because you've completely missed how the whole system and it's functions works.



as the US and NATO are not legally explaining to Russia or involving them in it.
Therefore Russia cannot make a proper decision if it is a threat to them.


Hit the showers.
Explain who decides if it's legal or not? Why should Europe and or NATO care what Russia wants or demands? It's not their system to begin with. Russia has no say in European affairs.


The agreement set up between Russia and the US was put in place so that each country had the opportunity to inspect and audit each other. This isn't happening between the US and Russia. The US isn't allowing the Russians to inspect the European Defense shield.

Besides that, Russia have every right to be pi$$ed about the defense shield because it give advantage to the US, which is what the whole point in the agreement was supposed to prevent.





top topics
 
67
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join