UK Halts Russian Military Agreement

reply to post by BarmyBilly

What military info? We haven't got a military left.

Yet more ludicrously extreme hyperbole.

Stop being ignorant.

Originally posted by concernedcitizen519


Seems like things with Russia are reaching some sort of new level. The U.K. has now decided to stop sharing their military info with the Russian's and I assume vice-versa.

Actually Russia stopped providing the info in 2007, it just took 4 years for the UK and the rest of europe to realize that they were getting screwed by Russia.

In 2007 Saudi Arabia announced they weren't accepting US Dollars for oil anymore and were starting the "Gulf Monetary Union".

Russia was just joining the bandwagon in hopes of a new Coalition against the US/Brits.

Originally posted by leosnake
reply to post by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi

 

they are going to use tanks to hide from radiation during the
nuclear war? or for what, Dimon?

What nuclear war?

And you do know that tanks have NBC protection, right?

edog11-

Any modern fighter can compete against each other in dogfights. When it comes to the F-22, I view it in terms of combat strategy. The American way of deploying fighters is to achieve air supremacy, and they use integrated combat systems to spread the same mission to multiple craft in real time. This requires specific, key elements to maintain this whole strategy. In my opinion, this strategy works well until AWACS craft start blowing up and interlink transmissions become erratic or compromised. There are just so many actual combat factors that cannot be implemented into simulations that could change the whole situation.

I'm not saying that the F-22 isn't a capable fighter... but really, American aircraft are ultra-expensive. On top of that, they require a lot of maintenance. Isn't it something like 30 maintenance hours per 1 hour of flight for a B2? Rediculous numbers like this cannot be afforded in serious combat conditions.

reply to post by concernedcitizen519


Barring nuclear weapons being used, which they wont be, Russia poses zero threat, and they know it.

Originally posted by edog11
Thanks OP.

First, we start to build a Missile-Shield which can serve as an anti ICBM/MRBM shield that would effectively and severely decrease Russia's ability to perform a second/retaliatory strike against Europe.

After Russia recognizes that this will give the West a severe strategic/nuclear advantage in the event of the west unleashing hell on Russia, they (Russia) tries to pressure the West into either giving up the Missile-Shield or signing a legally-binding agreement that ensures it will never be used by the West, against Russia.

We then of course disagree and tell Russia to basically go f*ck herself and that we can use it for whatever the hell we want (Including taking down Russian ICBM's after we nuke them).

You're right we should tell Russia we have no problem letting them dictate what our military can and can not do. Maybe we should let them elect our Presidents while we are at it. I mean it's not like the shield could be used to stop a preemptive strike from Russia, it ONLY works on retaliatory strikes right?

You think Russia is just being Paranoid? Take a look at this and decide for yourself:
1# Over the course of the last 10 years, the USA and NATO have Surrounded Russia by invading the Middle East under false-pretenses, building bases there, having troops there and injecting puppet-governments there.

We have had troops in the ME before the wars, although Afghanistan was obviously very friendly to Russia.

2# Israel, who is a very big ally to the USA and The West has received an extremely ridiculous amount of very high quality weapons from the USA the past few years, including "next-gen" bunker-busters (30.000lb?) that can be used to take out Russian Command&Control centers and launch facilities.

It's not like those bombs were a recent addition which could be used to strike Iran's underground nuclear facilities.

3# The region is being destabilized because of "protests" and Israel wants to attack Iran- both things are arguably caused by the same Western intelligence agencies.

Or arguably Russian agencies to force the west to spend money on interventions.

4# The West and Israel are pushing the agenda to attack Iran and Syria with the said countries being allies of Russia. This will have a negative strategical and economical impact on Russia to say the least.

Or maybe Russia should get its allies to settle down. Russia is helping Iran get nukes, can't be too surprised at the outcome.

5# And on top of all that, something is being built (Missile Shield) that will make sure that a high percentage of Russian ICBM's won't get through to strike back at Europe in case The West launches a first strike (this is the same as de-clawing Russian Nuclear Capabilities towards Europe).

Or prevents a Russian first strike scenario from working. Why mention that though, truth that doesn't push your agenda shouldn't be relevant.

And all of this in a time of high economic-instabilities.

Does anybody here blame Russia for being "paranoid"? What would the USA do if Russia was slowly taking out America's allies and was slowly surrounding the USA + on top of that, wanted to build something that would severely limit American Nuclear Strike-Back capabilities in the event of nuclear war?

I fear that nuclear war will be more likely than ever before in history if this issue isn't resolved diplomatically- FAST.


IT--

edit on 25-11-2011 by edog11 because: (no reason given)

Originally posted by Atzil321
I think these so called leaders of ours should be little more respectful and cautious towards the russians. Western counties 'the US in particular' are pushing too hard, don't be suprised if the old bear turns around and takes a few swipes at them

This whole European missile defence shield is a scandal. Imagine Russia setting up the same thing on the canadian border 'rendering the united states nuclear deterrent useless'. There would threats of nuclear war from the U.S and pandemonium at the united nations and nato. But the Russians should just STFU right? what a crock of #.

If the Russians could do it they would, if you think they wouldn't you're delusional. They are getting outplayed and do not like it. Why should western powers be at the mercy of Russian nukes if we can prevent it. If 5 years from now we had abandoned the shield and were in a nuclear war and we were decimated you would all be screaming how stupid it was to stop building the shield.

reply to post by OccamsRazor04


Russia should stop all negotiations on disarmament.
because the treaties of disarmament led to conflicts
Russia is not prepared to attack someone, is not to establish military bases in foreign countries and is preparing to repel an attack potential enemy only.
Siriya.Iran and North Korea are allies of Russia

reply to post by OccamsRazor04


I just think that during the exchange of missile strikes during a nuclear war, the tanks will be needed for protection against radiatio and only

Originally posted by leosnake
reply to post by OccamsRazor04

 

Russia should stop all negotiations on disarmament.
because the treaties of disarmament led to conflicts
Russia is not prepared to attack someone, is not to establish military bases in foreign countries and is preparing to repel an attack potential enemy only.
Siriya.Iran and North Korea are allies of Russia

Siriya.Iran and North Korea ARE NOT allies of Russia

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04
If 5 years from now we had abandoned the shield and were in a nuclear war and we were decimated you would all be screaming how stupid it was to stop building the shield.

You are justifying intensifying the threat of nuclear conflict, by stating that if you do not then you'll regret it in a hypothetical future nuclear conflict?

Personally, I think there would be far less of a chance of a future nuclear war if the ABM shield in Europe and Asia was scrapped immediately.

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04


If the Russians could do it they would, if you think they wouldn't you're delusional. They are getting outplayed and do not like it. Why should western powers be at the mercy of Russian nukes if we can prevent it. If 5 years from now we had abandoned the shield and were in a nuclear war and we were decimated you would all be screaming how stupid it was to stop building the shield.

Cuban Missile Crisis anyone? Look what a storm of outrage that caused.

reply to post by OneManArmy


Then there were 2 superpowers and now only one
I'm sure Russia will not do what crazy Khrushchev did

Originally posted by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi

You are justifying intensifying the threat of nuclear conflict, by stating that if you do not then you'll regret it in a hypothetical future nuclear conflict?

Personally, I think there would be far less of a chance of a future nuclear war if the ABM shield in Europe and Asia was scrapped immediately.

edit on 27-11-2011 by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi because: (no reason given)

Exactly, isnt that the mentality that fuelled the whole cold war nuclear proliferation...."Must have more nukes than the other guy"

reply to post by OneManArmy



now the United States and Russia have the ability to destroy each other several times
Now the arms race is not the quantity but in quality