US-Russia arms race to neutralise Europe

Nomatter how marginal today's anti-missle systems are, they have the potential to be vastly more accurate in the future. The new arms race for the 21st century will be in this field. The Russian military is now going to be hard pressed to come up with a missle shield that will be on par with what their neighbors have. There is a battle of prestige going on here, and it all turns on who is willing to spend the ost to achieve the best-looking defensive stance.

Originally posted by Vixion
Wait a minute, im no Einstein but if you can fire a defencsive missle thing at us to protect, im 99% sure you can fire an offensive one, so yanks, Bugger off, England is great we can hold our own.

Except it is not your choice.... It is the choice of the governments of Poland and the Czech Republic to make that decision...and guess what?... They didn't ask England, they asked for the United States to help...

[edit on 4-6-2007 by Muaddib]

It is the beginning of World War III.

I wonder how some of you can still be in favor of this missile defense base.
Who cares if it is only labelled as a "DEFENSE BASE". Who is going to control this #? Angela Merkel?
Will there be agents from Russia and all over the world constantly showing presence inside an american military installation?
To verify if they perhaps intend to use the Offensive Missiles, at some point?

I really doubt it. This whole idea is ridiculous.

And Justin; Who cares about the personell? EU or USA. Everything is corrupt. There is always a way of abuse and avoidance of transparency towards us, the people.. and probably there is not even going to be any control mechanism at all. So..

Muaddib, are you really a history student or is that only a label?
Because if yes, it's even more proof of your ignorance :]
The US government is dominating space, and clearly state they will "defend" their military interests by land, sea and space. They dominate oversea regions all over the place. And now they want to install a potentially offensive, or maybe only defensive, but anyhow clearly military installation in Europe.

First you talk about the countries who want "America's Help". Then you get corrected about historical facts and choice of words. And nothing changes about your opinion? What kind of student is that?

Can you please show me that a considerable amount of Eastern Countries, and i mean the people.. not the econo-fascist Elite. Ask for help from the US?
Did i miss something? Is Russia invading Europe?

The only dangerous and dominating government being internationally agressive and invasive i can see right now is the USA.
So this mentality can be translated to almost everything. Water (Nutrition), Space, Land, Air... Sea.

I think you are a severe victim of propaganda.

Maybe watch less TV. Be critical with Common Media News. Critical of Government and geopolitical intentions and changes of law.
Play less Games.

Because Propaganda is spreading EVERYWHERE:
World in Conflict - Closed Multiplayer Beta

"War is coming home"

We try to talk something real here. And not Fiction. OR would any of you supporters like to have a Russian Missile Defense System standing in your Garden?

Originally posted by Justin Oldham
Nomatter how marginal today's anti-missle systems are,

They were 'marginal' back in the 60's but today missile defense should not fail unless your trying to.

they have the potential to be vastly more accurate in the future.

There wont in my opinion be a future for missiles in defensive roles as lasers and particle beam weapons are very likely to take over those roles. There is at least some evidence to suggest that both the US and the USSR had operational mobile laser/particle beam weapon systems back in the 80's. They both certainly had fixed defenses that could damage sattelites and planes from orbit so i tend to believe in the claims of mobile systems

The new arms race for the 21st century will be in this field. The Russian military is now going to be hard pressed to come up with a missle shield that will be on par with what their neighbors have.

Not they will not as the US is playing catch up and have been for decades.

Along the way, having pieced together information from memoirs and recently declassified material, Mr. Lee says he has discovered hard evidence of something the U.S. long suspected but was never able to prove: Russia already has a national missile defense. Started by the Soviets even before the ABM Treaty took effect, the original defense was pretty rough. But as Mr. Lee says, unlike the Americans, the Soviets realized that "some defense is better than none," and kept upgrading its NMD even after it signed the ABM Treaty. Russia has continued to modernize the NMD system over the past decade, he adds.

www.opinionjournal.com...

Prior to 1967 there was a consensus that the SA-5 could be a SAM/ABM, with the Hen Houses as the battle-management radars. After 1967, however, the CIA argued that the SA-5 was only a SAM, and that the Hen Houses provided only early warning of a missile attack. By about 1970 the majority agreed. Subsequently only a handful of Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) analysts, plus occasionally the Air Force and a few Department of Defense officials, made the case for Soviet national ABM defenses based on the SA-5/SA-10 SAM/ABMs and the Hen House/LPARs as battle-management radars.

The CIA relied almost exclusively on the "hard evidence" from U.S. technical collection systems despite the fact that such evidence was inconclusive and plagued by major "intelligence gaps." Now Russian sources have filled in most of the intelligence gaps, thus refuting the CIA's analysis on every critical issue.

www.security-policy.org...

The Soviets have developed a surface to air missile -- SA-12. This missile is mobile. They are about to deploy it. In a few years they will have hundreds of them -- maybe 1000 or 2000 -- maybe more. The Soviets claim these missiles are there to defend against incoming airplanes.

What counts in such a defense is acceleration -- how quickly the missile can turn. That acceleration, published in reliable British sources, is "at least 10 times the acceleration that any pilot can stand." I estimate that with appropriate available equipment, these surface to air missiles could stop any incoming ballistic missile --particularly ours.

www.commonwealthclub.org...

However, Soviet and Russian sources, including former Premier Alexei Kosygin and the Chief Designer of the original Moscow ABM system, confirm that: the SA-5 and SA-10 were dual purpose antiaircraft/missile systems (SAM/ABMs), and that the Hen House and LPAR radars provided the requisite battle management target tracking data. These and other sources cited in The ABM Treaty Charade are not exhaustive.

Nevertheless, CIA has not revised its position on this issue, nor have the U.S. Congress and the public been informed that the ABM Treaty was a valid contract from beginning to end.

In the late 1960s the U.S. sacrificed its 20-year technological advantage in ABM defenses on the altar of "arms control." As Russian sources now admit, the Soviet General Staff was in total control of Soviet "arms control" proposals and negotiations, subject to Politburo review, which was largely pro forma. The Soviet military's objective was to gain as much advantage as possible from "arms control" agreements (SALT).

www.jinsa.org...

And i could go on for a while.

There is a battle of prestige going on here, and it all turns on who is willing to spend the ost to achieve the best-looking defensive stance.

The US long ago lost the spending battle ( the USSR spent more when it mattered in the period between the late 60's trough to the breakup of the USSR) and what they are doing now is a not so well handled attempt to catch up; something the total bankruptcy of the US economy speaks volumes about.

Stellar

Originally posted by missed_gear
Again, there is much more than simple military affiliations at work, but a small missile defense system and radar placement does have the Russians bugged…(even if for simple political reasons)...NATO is behind the concerns.

See below…

You are obviously correct in stating that this is related to politics and not 'military' affilitations but i am quite sure you have heard of war being a continuation of politics by other means?

I imagine, as this recent event evolves, one will see this somewhat integrated into NATO command and the existing NATO platform scheduled to go online around 2010 (which appears to be growing):

But NATO is still very much built around US forces and non of the other NATO members can or will support a interventionist strategy such is now driven by the US.

Imo, leading to Putin’s comment about targeting missiles at European nations since the NATO-Russia Council discussed this topic the very same day.

I am quite sure they were targetting European cities before but i suppose it makes for 'good' press.

Stellar

Originally posted by runetang
Listen up, I'm only going to say this once.

Russia has a role to play in the destruction of mankind and/or the Earth, as does the USA.

They do have the most dangerous weapons so it stands to reason that they will...

If you haven't noticed, Russia has been funding and aiding every country we have hostilities with, we being the USA, and also most European countries are in agreement with the Iranian line of policy.

Actually the US aided and funded the majority of the enemies it has fought since world war two including the USSR. The European leaders are not but they are having a ever harder time palying the war card when their citizens want nothing to do with the USA and it's terrorism.

They've equipped Iran with the latest and greatest anti-aircraft air defense systems, which also shoot down cruise missiles and the like.

But it wont be able to shoot down enough and the Iranians seem to be paying full price for it and they are not getting as much as they would have wanted.

The Tor-M1 mobile batteries, and they've already been deployed circling Iran's nuclear facilities. I've seen the overhead satellite photographs.

The Tor is a VERY short range defense system and has as far as i know little or no ability to prevent strikes against those facilities. The Tor is specifically intended to provide short range defense to more expensive and rare long range systems such as the Sa-5 and S-300. Did you see any of those deployed near the nuclear facilities?

They've also given this in a lesser amount to Syria. Syria has a few batteries, but not like Iran, Iran has been armed to the teeth with those things.

It does not matter how many Tor batteries Iran has as they just wont be able to change the outcome without support by high altitude systems.

The reason is obvious: Russia wants us to receive maximum casualties and losses if we were to attack Iran by air and sea.

So does most of the rest of the world who might be invaded or attacked if they attempeted to change their social policies or economic alliances.

Same goes for Israel attacking Syria by air. They also want to deter us outright from even trying to attack Iran. And now they use a defensive only missile shield as a reason to test-fire new nuclear ICBMs? great.

A denfensive missile shield based in the continental USA or in orbit is one thing but basing in on Russia's border is meant to illicit a violent reaction. The Russians have long been developing these new ICBM's while upgrading their ABM defenses and holing out mountains so that this is not a direct response to anything the US did. They have been testing new SLBM's and upgraded versions of older missiles relatively consistently so it you can make those tests correspond with other interesting events if you care to.

If Putin graduates into Anti-Christ mode, starts lobbing nukes around the world,

I am fairly confident that Russia will not be the one that starts the nuclear war and as sure that there will be great efforts to blame it on them. Putin is no anti-christ ( I don't think he goes to Bohemian grove or is a member of the Bilderberg/ CFR) and i reckon you can look closer to home to find those types.

supports an all-out assault on Israel by Iran, Syria, Hezbollah, etc, and starts making it possible for terrorists to aquire nuclear materials,

I don't think that is likely to happen. Russia seems perfectly content slowly destroying the US and whatever liberties it's citizens still enjoy ( patriot act II ) and i really doubt they will start the fights even if they seem quite able to lead or fool the US into engaging in these foreign adventures. Some have said that Iraq did in fact have those WOMD's and that the remaining materials and all related infrastructure were spirited away by Russian specialist and while i have a hard time believing that i really do wonder if those who manipulate the bush puppet can possibly gain by telling such obvious lies.

I don't believe Iraq was a military or strategic threat to the US but i am open to the idea that US policy makers truly believed that they would find at least something that could be called WOMD.

I would not be the least bit surprised. He's former KGB, so he used to be a damn assassin ..

As i understand he was supposedly a lower level bueorocratic type but if you have any information indicating otherwise...

excuse me, intelligence agent. He just seems like a bonafied CREEP..

Frankly Dick, Wolf, Perle ( The prince of darkness; i did not make that up btw) and the gang scares me far more than Putin does but maybe if i understood Russian i might be more worried....

Stellar