NATO declares missile shield up and running, page 5

Pages: << 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 27 times

reply posted on 21-5-2012 @ 01:38 AM by Miss Sile

Never have I seen my name in print so much! (FINALLY....getting the recognition I covet)

I don't know who said it, but somewhere in the thread someone said a shield was an act of aggression.......say what? How is defending oneself an act of aggression? By that logic if I .carry a gun for protection against potential murderers, I would be committing an act of aggression. Does not make sense. Someone explain please.

reply posted on 21-5-2012 @ 01:38 AM by neo96

reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL

According to the Nato creed an attack on one is an attack on all

There you go.

edit on 21-5-2012 by neo96 because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 21-5-2012 @ 01:40 AM by roguetechie

As I've pointed out already the CIVILIANS THEY ARE PROTECTING ARE POLISH CIVILIANS>.. YOu know since POLAND IS PART OF THE NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY ORGANIZATION aka NATO....

Sorry to scream this but I'm getting real sick of people spouting off like they know what they're talking about when they don't.

reply posted on 21-5-2012 @ 01:40 AM by THE_PROFESSIONAL

reply to post by neo96

So would you say the US is provoking Russia by placing the weapons in Poland?

reply posted on 21-5-2012 @ 01:41 AM by SLAYER69

reply to post by ecoparity

Click on the "Star Wars" thread linked down below v*v in my signature.

reply posted on 21-5-2012 @ 01:41 AM by THE_PROFESSIONAL

reply to post by Miss Sile

It is different when dealing with nuclear missiles under the MAD doctrine. An ABM shield is considered offensive under it.

reply posted on 21-5-2012 @ 01:42 AM by SLAYER69

reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL

Would you say Russia is provoking Poland by placing OFFENSIVE nukes on their border?

reply posted on 21-5-2012 @ 01:42 AM by neo96

reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL

No why the hell would anyone say that?

Nato has how many other member countries and it was formed for what express purpose?

The Defense of Europe.

reply posted on 21-5-2012 @ 01:43 AM by THE_PROFESSIONAL

reply to post by SLAYER69

Those Russian nukes are targeted at whom?

If Poland places their OWN nukes then that would be a different story, but the USA is placing its nukes there.

If Russia placed its nukes close to the USA then it would be provoking.

Poland has a right to place its own nukes ANYWHERE it wants,but it is placing US nukes. Therefore USA is provoking Russia.

edit on 013131p://5America/ChicagoMon, 21 May 2012 01:46:56 -0500 by THE_PROFESSIONAL because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 21-5-2012 @ 01:45 AM by THE_PROFESSIONAL

reply to post by neo96

But they are placing an offensive missile system there and it is causing provocation. Now Poland is a higher priory to be attacked.

Everything was fine for many years without a ABM system in Poland and someone had a wet dream and just decided to up and up put one there?

It just seems someone wants a world war.

reply posted on 21-5-2012 @ 01:49 AM by neo96

reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL

That same crap over and over again ANTI-BALLISTIC MISSILES are not offensive weapons anyone with a smidgen of weapons systems knowledge KNOWS this.

edit on 21-5-2012 by neo96 because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 21-5-2012 @ 01:51 AM by THE_PROFESSIONAL

reply to post by neo96

ABM systems when designed to defend against nuclear tipped ICBMs are classified according to the ABM treaty as offensive weapons.

Sorry dude, they are offensive weapons when they are used as they are in Poland.

reply posted on 21-5-2012 @ 01:52 AM by SLAYER69

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
reply to post by SLAYER69

Those Russian nukes are targeted at whom?

Good question, unless Russia wants to give that secret away I doubt anybody would know. I highly doubt they are aimed at Gambia...

If Poland places their OWN nukes then that would be a different story, but the USA is placing its nukes there.

The Soviets placed all kinds of weapons in Poland during the Cold War.
Remember?

If Russia placed its nukes close to the USA then it would be provoking.

That's exactly why the Soviets/Russia built a huge Nuke sub fleet.

That way they could place them just a few miles off the coast.

Get it?

Poland has a right to place its own nukes ANYWHERE it wants,but it is placing US nukes. Therefore USA is provoking Russia.

Poland has a RIGHT to do whatever the hell they want irregardless what Russia wants.

edit on 21-5-2012 by SLAYER69 because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 21-5-2012 @ 01:55 AM by neo96

reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL

So what is your point?

Carter(the weasel politician signed) the ABM treaty and was signed with the Former Soviet Union and We withdrew from it on 2002.

So who gives a crap?

reply posted on 21-5-2012 @ 01:55 AM by THE_PROFESSIONAL

reply to post by SLAYER69

Good question, unless Russia wants to give that secret away I doubt anybody would know. I highly doubt they are aimed at Gambia...

Unfortunately neither of us would ever know this..

The Soviets placed all kinds of weapons in Poland during the Cold War. Remember?

Indeed they did

That's exactly why the Soviets/Russian built a huge Nuke sub fleet. That way they could place them just a few miles off the coast. Get it?

We have a sub fleet to that is guaranteed to be lurking in those areas and also around russia. This is a complimentary system to the sub system.

Russians have subs, so does the USA. Ok so Even
Russians have ICBMS, so does the USA. Ok still even
USA places ABM systems in Poland, Ok now it is not even and MAD is not working

This is why Russia is concerned

Bottom line is that this system is OFFENSIVE no matter what neo the ABM missle expert will tell you.

Poland has a RIGHT to do whatever the hell they want irregardless what Russia wants.

Well it is up to them if they want to be smoked by Russia now because they are now a bigger target to them. The same can be said that Iran has a right to do what the hell they want irregardless of what USA wants as a side note.

edit on 013131p://5America/ChicagoMon, 21 May 2012 01:57:23 -0500 by THE_PROFESSIONAL because: (no reason given)

edit on 013131p://5America/ChicagoMon, 21 May 2012 01:58:31 -0500 by THE_PROFESSIONAL because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 21-5-2012 @ 01:56 AM by roguetechie

Mind you this is POLISH missile system since it's in Poland and under the aegis of NATO not an American missile system.. Do you honestly think the Poles would just say ho hum if someone else tried to place a system they didn't want on their soil?

reply posted on 21-5-2012 @ 01:58 AM by sonnny1

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL

Russians have subs, so does the USA. Ok so Even
Russians have ICBMS, so does the USA. Ok still even
USA places ABM systems in Poland, Ok now it is not even and MAD is not working

So your PROFESSIONALLY Angry,America/NATO one-upped Russia ?

What would appease you ?

A new Berlin Wall ?

Russia controlled Poland?

Soviet Union,back up and running?

Geez............

edit on 21-5-2012 by sonnny1 because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 21-5-2012 @ 01:59 AM by roguetechie

Russians have subs, so does the USA. Ok so Even
Russians have ICBMS, so does the USA. Ok still even
USA places ABM systems in Poland, Ok now it is not even and MAD is not working

This is why Russia is concerned

And again I'll state that:

A. Poland has a missile system IN POLAND which you've already agreed the Polish can do anything they want in their territory
B. The russians have ABM technology as well and they place it in any area they feel needs it at will so why can't we?
C. This argument is just plain getting silly every time someone refutes your points you double back and list a point that's already been thoroughly debunked.

reply posted on 21-5-2012 @ 01:59 AM by THE_PROFESSIONAL

reply to post by sonnny1

It is not one upping, it is provoking. Do you not see how much cry babies we were during the cuban missile crisis? We are pulling the same exact thing.

reply posted on 21-5-2012 @ 02:00 AM by THE_PROFESSIONAL

reply to post by roguetechie

B. The russians have ABM technology as well and they place it in any area they feel needs it at will so why can't we?

They can place in an RUSSIA area.

C. This argument is just plain getting silly every time someone refutes your points you double back and list a point that's already been thoroughly debunked.

Nothing has been debunked dude.