Putin to US: Danger of Mutual Destruction!

Putin to US: Danger of Mutual Destruction!

www.gulf-daily-news.com

MOSCOW: Russian President Vladimir Putin yesterday warned that US plans to deploy an anti-missile system in eastern Europe sharply increases the danger of mutual destruction.

In comments laden with Cold War imagery, the Kremlin leader accused the US of misrepresenting the true aim of the limited missile shield, which is to be based in Czech Republic and Poland.

(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.csmonitor.com

[edit on 24-5-2007 by UM_Gazz]

The tensions just keep ratcheting up over this planned missile shield, I hope Bush doesn't kick off a new cold war or arms race.

Suspending compliance with this treaty could futher inflame an already strained relationship between Russia and the U.S.

www.gulf-daily-news.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

Considering the climate of today, I'd rather face the Devil we know...though I do kind of agree with the Russian sentiment. Putting Missile Shield systems in those key locations is very provocative on the part of the US.

With all due respect, provocative is rather a strong word for a purely defensive system, Condoleezza Rice has stated that the missile shield would prove useless against russia's massive missile arsenel. So one would question why is Putin so worried about this system?

If Russia were to place missile defense systems along your border, no matter how useless they were, would you object?

[edit on 28-4-2007 by sardion2000]

Originally posted by sardion2000
If Russia were to place missile defense systems along your border, no matter how useless they were, would you object?

[edit on 28-4-2007 by sardion2000]

The USSR is fast asleep but not dead, Russia wants those countries that have broken away back, they just haven’t figured out how to do it yet. But a shield would complicate things for them because although the shield would not in itself stop Russia, it would imply they where part of the other European countries, and aligned with the West, mainly America.

The bear wishes to emerge from hibernation, and is restless and hungry

Originally posted by sardion2000
If Russia were to place missile defense systems along your border, no matter how useless they were, would you object?

[edit on 28-4-2007 by sardion2000]

Thats like comparing apples to oranges we do not have a border with russia, nor does russia have a missile defence capability to equal ours( I'm not sure if they do or not) , But just for arguements sake, we say they did have a missile defence system like ours and wanted to position it in cuba for cuba's defense. I would say "why not" if it's purely for defensive purposes. We already have MAD senerio on the card table anyway so why not throw in a few jokers.

Just to add to my above post I believe I read somewhere that Russia has a missile defence system of some sort but it hasn't been proven yet, but just to add to the thinking here....Russia being so inflamitory in her statements gives cause for some suspicion wouldn't you agree??

Originally posted by the_sentinal
With all due respect, provocative is rather a strong word for a purely defensive system, Condoleezza Rice has stated that the missile shield would prove useless against russia's massive missile arsenel. So one would question why is Putin so worried about this system?

If you want to put it that way, then if its so useless, why even bother wasting the money to place it there and then on top of it cause everything our past presidencies have worked hard to achieve as far as peace and dismantling goes to go flying out the window in less then 6 years.

If you believe Condoleeza Rice at this stage of the game there has got to be something wrong. This is why Putin is not going for the shpiel. I would think his being the President of a nation as well as a former KGB he would know when he is being given a line of bullcrap.



Just remember, these guys go deep underground if the stuff hits the fan...they could care less about the peons frying on the surface.

Originally posted by the_sentinal
Just to add to my above post I believe I read somewhere that Russia has a missile defence system of some sort but it hasn't been proven yet, but just to add to the thinking here....Russia being so inflamitory in her statements gives cause for some suspicion wouldn't you agree??

Well if they develop a Missile Defense system after we have placed ours at their doorstep, I would bet you can expect to see one built on that little island called Cuba.

Pie

The problem with that Pie is that it would be very easy for us to stop them, the same way we did it before. We have an advantage over cuba considering we can create a simple blockage off the tip of florida preventing russian ships. Putting them in cuba BTW would give Russia zero advantage at all unless they put ones that do damage. From what I understand the USA is not doing that in the Czech Republic.

Originally posted by Reform America
The problem with that Pie is that it would be very easy for us to stop them, the same way we did it before. We have an advantage over cuba considering we can create a simple blockage off the tip of florida preventing russian ships. Putting them in cuba BTW would give Russia zero advantage at all unless they put ones that do damage. From what I understand the USA is not doing that in the Czech Republic.

Then you could say that if we react in such a way, then what Bush is doing is provacative and its not as useless as Dr. Rice admits. If its so useless and not to be construed as being something that should rile up Russia then it shouldn't be something that would bother us so badly that we'd have to revert ourselves back to 1961 and have a Cuban Missile Crisis all over again.

Originally posted by the_sentinal

Originally posted by sardion2000
If Russia were to place missile defense systems along your border, no matter how useless they were, would you object?

[edit on 28-4-2007 by sardion2000]

Thats like comparing apples to oranges we do not have a border with russia, nor does russia have a missile defence capability to equal ours( I'm not sure if they do or not) , But just for arguements sake, we say they did have a missile defence system like ours and wanted to position it in cuba for cuba's defense. I would say "why not" if it's purely for defensive purposes. We already have MAD senerio on the card table anyway so why not throw in a few jokers.

Yes it's like comparing Apples with Oranges;
You americans notoriously seem to confound an offensive war with defensive measures.

I live in Switzerland. Don't need to be Russian to dislike US "DEFENSE SHIELD WHATEVER BLAH ROCKETS" in the East.
Can you understand that there is nothing "Defensive" about placing your Video-Game Defense Missile System in other Countries?

Would you like a Swiss Defense System in Washington or New York?
A purely Defensive War Technology I have to emphasize!

[edit on 28-4-2007 by osram]

[edit on 28-4-2007 by osram]

[edit on 28-4-2007 by osram]

you know its is very worrying i have few friends who work with RKK Energia and they say their is lot of talk on the back channels about reviving old cold war programs like FOBS (fractional orbital bombardment system). if FOBS come on line it will be quite difficult for the existing missile defense and early warning systems to track the incoming warheads

This is nothing like comparing apples and oranges as stated above.

No matter whether this is a defensive or offensive missile system -- it is still US military hardware.

No matter how you put a spin on it, or believe what you are been told about it; this system would not even be considered if it wasn't really beneficial to the US in some way.

As a Brit, I see Bush as an idiot that seems to love war (that's Bush, not every American by extension). He has ruined the international reputation of the US in just a few short years. He (along with Blair) has lied, big lies, and took us into a war in Iraq, why should we believe him this time?
Isn't this system in geographically in the wrong place to defend against missile attacks from the gulf?
What are the real reasons for it's location?
What are the benefits for the US?
Why is Putin so angry?
Does he know something through his spy buddies that we don't?
To me Putin seems to be a harsh, but fair, man -- why so upset about this?

I don't think the US should create more military presence around the world at this time with everything else that it is involved in that is going wrong.

Oh, and if it was Russia planning on building a missile system along the Mexico border (for some bizarre reason) Americans would be up-in-arms about it. I wouldn't believe anyone that says otherwise.

The post by osram & CarlosG proves why Putin is useing such harsh language toward the west, he is obviously trying to widen the gap between the US and Europe. The harshness of Putins stand on this issue is making the europeans nervous putting pressure on Bush to back down.

[edit on 28-4-2007 by the_sentinal]

Originally posted by the_sentinal
With all due respect, provocative is rather a strong word for a purely defensive system, Condoleezza Rice has stated that the missile shield would prove useless against russia's massive missile arsenel. So one would question why is Putin so worried about this system?

You know, there is no such weapon that could be purely defensive. ANY offensive operation includes defensive operations and threat suppression, especially on strategic level. This ABM system is, as far as I know, also most probably effective as an anti-satellite weapon (and satellite is much easier target then an ICBM, since you can calculate where and when will it appear), so it could be used to destroy geosyncronous satellites above Russia, thus possibly compromising Russian strategic air defense and opening 'window' for attack.

Anyway, this is a projection of force deep into Russian teritory, so Ruskies can't and won't take it lightly.

Just my 0.02€.

Oh, and by the way, this all stuff reminds me a little of Cuban missile crisis. Luckily, no nuclear weapons included this time. At least, not yet.

Im looking for the portion of this topic or article that covers Russia's withdrawal from a treaty with NATO covering the conventional forces in Europe. I was told this thread is already covering it.

Originally posted by the_sentinal
The post by osram & CarlosG proves why Putin is useing such harsh language toward the west, he is obviously trying to widen the gap between the US and Europe. The harshness of Putins stand on this issue is making the europeans nervous putting pressure on Bush to back down.

[edit on 28-4-2007 by the_sentinal]

Perhaps its the other way, the US is widening the gap by deploying this initiative. I completely understand osram's post and it has merit. I further back the Russians on this too. The US should keep their toys in their own backyard no one else wants them. Even though its labeled a defensive strategy (and really who honestly believes that load of bunk) its considered, and rightfully so, an offensive threat to anyone else. Maybe if the US spent less time pissin people off on the foreign front they wouldn't have so many other countries upset. This is nothing but a wolf in sheep's clothing.

brill

Hmmmm….

In Moscow, Defense Minister Igor Sergeyev asserted that a U.S. missile defense could easily be defeated by technologies the former Soviet Union developed in the 1980s in response to President Reagan's Star Wars plan that was a more ambitious attempt to defend against all-out missile attacks…Source Year 2001

Plenty of time has passed to move around the US defensive system.

Imo, this is just another simple attempt at political manipulation for wanting ears in the wake of presidential campaigns, nothing more....


mg