• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

U.S.: Russia Violated Treaty By Testing Cruise Missile

Μολὼν λαβέ

Si vis pacem, para bellum
DP Veteran
Joined
May 7, 2011
Messages
6,914
Reaction score
3,673
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
The United States has concluded that Russia violated a landmark arms control treaty by testing a prohibited ground-launched cruise missile, according to senior American officials, a finding that was conveyed by President Obama to Russian President Vladimir V. Putin in a letter on Monday.

At the heart of the issue is the 1987 treaty that bans medium-range missiles, which are defined as ground-launched ballistic or cruise missiles capable of flying 300 to 3,400 miles. That accord, which was signed by President Ronald Reagan and Mikhail S. Gorbachev, the Soviet leader, helped seal the end of the Cold War and has been regarded as a cornerstone of American-Russian arms control efforts.

Russia first began testing the cruise missiles as early as 2008, according to American officials, and the Obama administration concluded by the end of 2011 that they were a compliance concern. In May 2013, Rose Gottemoeller, the State Department’s senior arms control official, first raised the possibility of a violation with Russian officials.

Was this the flexibility Obama conveyed to Russian President Medvedev prior to the 2012 elections?

Why has the administration waited so long to find this egregious breech a problem?

NATO’s top commander, Gen. Philip M. Breedlove, has said that the violation requires a response if it cannot be resolved.

“A weapon capability that violates the I.N.F., that is introduced into the greater European land mass, is absolutely a tool that will have to be dealt with,” he said in an interview in April. “It can’t go unanswered.”

Have the war tom toms started a slow and quiet beat... or, is President Obama just attempting to look strong in the face of much adversity lately?

U.S.: Russia Violated Treaty By Testing Cruise Missile
 
It's Obama, would you expect anything more than stupidity?
 
Μολὼν λαβέ;1063576745 said:
Was this the flexibility Obama conveyed to Russian President Medvedev prior to the 2012 elections?

Why has the administration waited so long to find this egregious breech a problem?



Have the war tom toms started a slow and quiet beat... or, is President Obama just attempting to look strong in the face of much adversity lately?

U.S.: Russia Violated Treaty By Testing Cruise Missile

I can feel Gorbachev crying right now at the degradation of the Russian state by it's leader. The poor guy worked pretty hard to pull Russia to a better stance with the U.S and quite frnakly much of the Western world (maybe whole world).
 
I can feel Gorbachev crying right now at the degradation of the Russian state by it's leader. The poor guy worked pretty hard to pull Russia to a better stance with the U.S and quite frnakly much of the Western world (maybe whole world).

And Putin seems to be living in the cold war past.
 
So it was a treaty signed by Reagan and the old Soviet Union, ok.
 
So it was a treaty signed by Reagan and the old Soviet Union, ok.

It bans medium-range missiles, which are defined as ground-launched ballistic or cruise missiles capable of flying 300 to 3,400 miles.

I wonder if Obama has second thoughts about pulling missiles out of Poland and the Czech Republic now?
 
Μολὼν λαβέ;1063576915 said:
It bans medium-range missiles, which are defined as ground-launched ballistic or cruise missiles capable of flying 300 to 3,400 miles.

I wonder if Obama has second thoughts about pulling missiles out of Poland and the Czech Republic now?

Mo, I think you missed my point.
 
So it was a treaty signed by Reagan and the old Soviet Union, ok.

So is it your contention that Russia is not bound by any of it's prior Soviet era treaty obligations and that conversely the United States is also not bound by them?
 
Μολὼν λαβέ;1063576745 said:
Was this the flexibility Obama conveyed to Russian President Medvedev prior to the 2012 elections?

Why has the administration waited so long to find this egregious breech a problem?

I ask the same question, why did Obama wait so long ?

What's Obama going to do about it ?

Do what Reagan did and build a 600 ship Navy ? :thinking

That's right, Obama is doing the opposite and is down sizing the Navy.

This was a treaty between the USA and the USSR, it doesn't involve anyone else.
 
Μολὼν λαβέ;1063576915 said:
It bans medium-range missiles, which are defined as ground-launched ballistic or cruise missiles capable of flying 300 to 3,400 miles.

I wonder if Obama has second thoughts about pulling missiles out of Poland and the Czech Republic now?

When Obama appeased Putin and removed those missiles from Poland and the Czech Republic without getting anything in return from Russia is when Putin lost all respect of Obama and looked at him as a weak and stupid head of state who didn't know how geopolitics are played. From that day on, Obama looked like a pantywaist in the eyes of the world. You know the saying, if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck.
 
So is it your contention that Russia is not bound by any of it's prior Soviet era treaty obligations and that conversely the United States is also not bound by them?

Obviously.
 
When Obama appeased Putin and removed those missiles from Poland and the Czech Republic without getting anything in return from Russia is when Putin lost all respect of Obama and looked at him as a weak and stupid head of state who didn't know how geopolitics are played. From that day on, Obama looked like a pantywaist in the eyes of the world. You know the saying, if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck.

No Apache. After the first gulf war, when Rumsfeld said, now we know we can do whatever we want in the ME, and Russia won't do anything about it is when respect went out the window. Assuming that there ever was any?
 
So is it your contention that Russia is not bound by any of it's prior Soviet era treaty obligations and that conversely the United States is also not bound by them?

Obviously.

Try again. I love it when people think their opinion is correct because its their OPINION. A little research could save some :3oops:.

TREATY BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND THE UNION OF SOVIET SOCIALIST REPUBLICS ON THE ELIMINATION OF THEIR INTERMEDIATE-RANGE AND SHORTER-RANGE MISSILES

Following the December 25, 1991, dissolution of the Soviet Union, the United States sought to secure continuation of full implementation of the INF Treaty regime and to multilateralize the INF Treaty with twelve former Soviet republics which the United States considers INF Treaty successors.2 Of the twelve successor states, six -- Belarus, Kazakstan, Russia, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, and Uzbekistan -- have inspectable INF facilities on their territory. Of these six, four -- Belarus, Kazakstan, Russia, and Ukraine -- are active participants in the process of implementing the Treaty. With the agreement of the other Parties, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan, each with only one inspectable site on its territory, while participants, have assumed a less active role, foregoing attendance at sessions of the SVC and participation in inspections.

The multilateralizing of what was previously a bilateral U.S.-Soviet INF Treaty required establishing agreements between the United States and the governments of the relevant Soviet successor states on numerous issues. In the SVC and through diplomatic contacts with the actively participating successor states, the United States worked to secure agreements to ensure continuation of the viability of the Treaty regime and to assure the exercise by the United States of its rights under the Treaty. Among the tasks undertaken were: arrangements for the settlement of costs connected with implementation activities in the new, multilateral Treaty context; the establishment of new points of entry (POE's) in Belarus, Kazakstan, and Ukraine through which to conduct inspections of the former INF facilities in those countries; and the establishment of communications links between the United States and those countries for transmission of various Treaty-related notifications. Other issues that have been discussed in the SVC include multilateral operating procedures for the SVC's concurrent continuous monitoring under the START I and INF Treaties, and inspection procedures for new missiles exiting from the Votkinsk Machine Building Plant in Russia.

INF TREATY
 
Last edited:
Μολὼν λαβέ;1063577523 said:
Try again. I love it when people think their opinion is correct because its their OPINION. A little research could save some :3oops:.



INF TREATY

Neither party has any respect for that antiquated treaty which no longer serves their interests.


On February 10, 2007, Russian Federation President Vladimir Putin declared that the INF Treaty no longer serves Russia's interests. On February 14, ITAR-Tass and Interfax quoted General Yuri Baluyevsky, the Russian military's chief of general staff, as saying that Russia could pull out of the INF, and that the decision would depend on the United States' actions with its proposed Ground-Based Midcourse Defense missile defense system, parts of which the U.S. at the time planned to deploy in Poland and the Czech Republic (since then, the plans have been abandoned in favor of different systems based on sea and in Romania, see National missile defense).


For its part the United States is attempting to side step the treaty limits with sub launched intermediate-range missiles as one option for the Prompt Global Strike mission.[5]


http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intermediate-Range_Nuclear_Forces_Treaty
 
Neither party has any respect for that antiquated treaty which no longer serves their interests.


On February 10, 2007, Russian Federation President Vladimir Putin declared that the INF Treaty no longer serves Russia's interests. On February 14, ITAR-Tass and Interfax quoted General Yuri Baluyevsky, the Russian military's chief of general staff, as saying that Russia could pull out of the INF, and that the decision would depend on the United States' actions with its proposed Ground-Based Midcourse Defense missile defense system, parts of which the U.S. at the time planned to deploy in Poland and the Czech Republic (since then, the plans have been abandoned in favor of different systems based on sea and in Romania, see National missile defense).

Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

From your source.

In July 2014, the United States formally notified Russia of the breach, while Russian officials called the treaty unsuitable for Russia and unfair because other countries in Asia had such weapons.

So Putin's word alone is law? Don't think so...

One can't unilaterally and legally wash their hands of a treaty.

For its part the United States is attempting to side step the treaty limits with sub launched intermediate-range missiles as one option for the Prompt Global Strike mission.[5]

Side-step?

The treaty eliminated nuclear and conventional ground-launched ballistic and cruise missiles with intermediate ranges, defined as between 500-5,500 km (300-3,400 miles).

Category:Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty - Wikimedia Commons
 
Μολὼν λαβέ;1063577774 said:
Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

From your source.



So Putin's word alone is law? Don't think so...

One can't unilaterally and legally wash their hands of a treaty.



Side-step?



Category:Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty - Wikimedia Commons

Yes. Putin has determined that that old treaty no longer serves the interests of Russia, not unlike anything the US has done before, often, cutting our teeth on the dozens of broken treaties with the Native American tribes who's lands we appropriated. I'm sure Obamas letter on Monday has Putin concerned.


When the US decides a treaty is no longer serving our purpose we withdraw.



The Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty (ABM Treaty or ABMT) was a treaty between the United States and the Soviet Union on the limitation of the anti-ballistic missile (ABM) systems used in defending areas against missile-delivered nuclear weapons. Under the terms of the treaty, each party was limited to two ABM complexes, each of which were to be limited to 100 anti-ballistic missiles.[1]

Signed in 1972, it was in force for the next 30 years. Following the dissolution of the Soviet Union, in 1997 the United States and four former Soviet republics agreed to succeed to the treaty. In June 2002 the United States withdrew from the treaty, leading to its termination.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom