Page 5 of 11 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 104

Thread: Nato wary of Russian treaty plan

  1. #41
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 02:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: Nato wary of Russian treaty plan

    Quote Originally Posted by Maximus Zeebra View Post
    Why not put the shield in NATO country Turkey instead? Its a much better fit for location. Why just go ahead with the plans without bringing Russia in on them and negotiating with them?
    The interceptors and radars are going into Poland and the Czech Republic.
    These are NATO countries.

    The missile defense system is a post-apogee midcourse/terminal phase system. Putting the system closer to the launch point (and away from the target area) reduces it effectiveness.

    Lets see what the US does if Russia places missiles on Cuba to protect it from Mexico.. Doesn't affect the US, since Russia already have tons of missiles pointed at the US..
    Are they are post-apogee midcourse/terminal phase interceptors?
    If so, then the US would do nothing.
    Disagree?
    Then tell me -- why would the US do anything about something that doesnt affect its deterrent?

    You people just cannot see things from any other perspective than your own, thats what is wrong.
    You refuse to see reality and, instead, insist on focusuing on the US as the root of all problems in the world.
    That is what's wrong.

  2. #42
    Banned Goobieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-22-15 @ 02:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    17,343

    Re: Nato wary of Russian treaty plan

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    At the current moment.
    So you agree that the Russian protests are invalid.

    But everyone knows that equipment over time gets better.
    When the system evolves/upgrades/increases to the point that the Russian protests are valid, then you can revisit the issue. Umtil then, this is all Russian posturing, intended to draw in people like you.

    Hell, given our hit rates, it's unlikely we can even stop a salvo of 4 missiles.
    This is unsupportable.
    Last edited by Goobieman; 02-03-09 at 11:16 AM.

  3. #43
    Human 2.0
    Maximus Zeebra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Western Europe
    Last Seen
    09-07-17 @ 10:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    6,568

    Re: Nato wary of Russian treaty plan

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    The interceptors and radars are going into Poland and the Czech Republic.
    These are NATO countries.
    As of a while ago, it seems the plans will not move forward at all. Obama is not pushing this issue at all as far as I have understood.

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    The missile defense system is a post-apogee midcourse/terminal phase system. Putting the system closer to the launch point (and away from the target area) reduces it effectiveness.
    If the shield was placed in Turkey, the radar on in the east and the rockets in the west it would give plenty of time, AND it would protect Israel at the same time.

    Why not radars in Israel and Turkey and than the missiles in Turkey and possibly the UK. That would be far more effective to discover launches from the middle east, having the radars closer, and the anti missiles also somewhat closer, but also further away in the UK.

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    Are they are post-apogee midcourse/terminal phase interceptors?
    If so, then the US would do nothing.
    Disagree?
    Then tell me -- why would the US do anything about something that doesnt affect its deterrent?
    I think the US would react if Russia just put up short range missiles in Cuba for example. Or put up missile shields in central and south America, Africa and the pacific Asia.

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    You refuse to see reality and, instead, insist on focusuing on the US as the root of all problems in the world.
    That is what's wrong.
    I do not see the US as the root of the problems, but I see our own society as something that WE need to focus on, not focus on everyone else, while our societies are like they are. And afterall, who is a country with dysfunctional democracy, to try and force democracy on others? What about our own problems in the west? Why not focus on those? Are we not a problem at all? Can we really see the problems we ourselves cause? We are supposed to be a civilized example for others to follow, and as of now, the west is definetely not.
    I am just trying to opening people eyes that not everything is perfect at home, while everything is awful in other places, and that we are NOT always right, and others ALWAYS wrong. That seems to be the general idea around, that people blindly follow our own agenda, often a side of this agenda, and is completely unaware of the agenda of others, and completely stripped of understanding for other perspectives than a western perspective. Thats the point, and another point is that if the west continues to decline and continue in our current downwards spiral, we will become the root of all problems eventually.
    Europe is illegally occupied by the US

  4. #44
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Last Seen
    03-29-10 @ 12:03 AM
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    3,379

    Re: Nato wary of Russian treaty plan

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    The interceptors and radars are going into Poland and the Czech Republic.
    These are NATO countries.
    The missile defense system is a post-apogee midcourse/terminal phase system. Putting the system closer to the launch point (and away from the target area) reduces it effectiveness. .


    Putting the system in Turkey or Hungry wouldn’t be closer. Cobra Dane has the goal to be closer. Radars often should be closer. Where did you get such info? Did you make it up? Cobra Dane rings a bell?
    DefenseLink News Transcript: DoD News Briefing with Lt. Gen. Obering from the Pentagon

    ‘’Next slide.

    Now, we are building an integrated layered system. Now, what do I mean by that? It means that in every one of the phases of flight of an enemy missile -- there's a boosting phase, a power phase, a midcourse or coasting phase that for the majority -- the vast majority of these missiles occurs in space, and then there's a terminal phase where it's reentering the atmosphere or homing in on the target -- we are trying to develop and field defenses in each one of those phases, the boost, midcourse and terminal.’’



    Kinetic energy interceptor is also a boost-phase defense, and it is based on the premise that we have a very high acceleration booster that's mobile, that we can move close to the threat country and be able to get the acceleration needed to shoot down a missile while it is still boosting.
    In addition, we have modified the radar at Cobra Dane, and as well in Beale (Air Force Base) in California. And with the emplacement of up to 21 interceptors in Alaska and three in California, that gave us the protection that I talked about earlier in our first block, so to speak, against a potential North Korean threat. And of course we tie that together with the command and control suites that we deploy from Hawaii to Omaha, to Colorado Springs, to the national capital region and fire control in Alaska as well.



    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    Are they are post-apogee midcourse/terminal phase interceptors?
    If so, then the US would do nothing.
    Disagree?
    Then tell me -- why would the US do anything about something that doesnt affect its deterrent? .
    So, the US, knowing how hostile Cuban Gov-nt is to the US would believe Putin’s word that they are post-apogee midcourse/terminal phase interceptors and do nothing?

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    When the system evolves/upgrades/increases to the point that the Russian protests are valid, then you can revisit the issue. Umtil then, this is all Russian posturing, intended to draw in people like you. .

    So, Putin should wait until the US informs him it is time revisit the issue. Putin, we are good guys, it is OK for you to be at our mercy, especially when we put a missile system at your doors in a country that is unfriendly to you and supports military conflicts against you.



    DefenseLink News Transcript: DoD News Briefing with Lt. Gen. Obering from the Pentagon

    Oftentimes, we're painted in missile defense as being in conflict with arms control measures or nonproliferation measures, and I believe nothing could be farther than (sic) the truth. In fact, I believe that one of the reasons we've seen the proliferation of these missiles in the past is that there has historically been no defense against them. So they are of a lot of value to nations like Iran and North Korea. If we join together -- U.S., NATO, Russia -- and field effective missile defenses, I believe it will have an effect on the value of these weapons. It will devalue them in the eyes of some of these countries.


    We call Putin, fashist, human right violator, KGB, dictator, we conduct wide propagandist campaigns against Russia, our media always lies and misrepresents events in Russia, we openly without any shame declare the goal of spreading the Western democracy in Russia, we arm, train and support states hostile and unfairly hostile to Russia, we encourage and get directly involved in murder of Russian nationals, we tramp moral and decency supporting regimes in Georgia and Ukraine, we disregard will and NATURAL rights of Ukrainians, Ossetians, Abkhazians and totally disregard Russian national interests and reject Russia’s rights to have such, we reject Russia’s right for equal treatment, - and then what kind of reaction do you expect from the Russian government and Russian people who give their government the highest rate of approval?
    Last edited by justone; 02-03-09 at 09:04 PM.

  5. #45
    Human 2.0
    Maximus Zeebra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Western Europe
    Last Seen
    09-07-17 @ 10:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    6,568

    Re: Nato wary of Russian treaty plan

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    When the system evolves/upgrades/increases to the point that the Russian protests are valid, then you can revisit the issue. Umtil then, this is all Russian posturing, intended to draw in people like you.
    .
    If they followed the US political line, they would already have pre-emptively bombed the US with nuclear weapons
    Europe is illegally occupied by the US

  6. #46
    Equal Opportunity Hater
    obvious Child's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
    Last Seen
    12-09-14 @ 11:36 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    19,883

    Re: Nato wary of Russian treaty plan

    Quote Originally Posted by Goobieman View Post
    So you agree that the Russian protests are invalid.
    Based on the current system.

    When the system evolves/upgrades/increases to the point that the Russian protests are valid, then you can revisit the issue. Umtil then, this is all Russian posturing, intended to draw in people like you.
    Can you read? Or are you just being dishonest? I just gave the reason why Russia is 'angry.' How did they draw me in when I just pointed out they are faking anger merely to get public support for massive spending?

    This is unsupportable.
    Care to look at the current accuracy hit rates? Last I checked, they were barely above a passing grade in our school systems.
    "If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him." - Sun Tzu

  7. #47
    Defender of the Faith
    ludahai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Taichung, Taiwan - 2017 East Asian Games Candidate City
    Last Seen
    07-03-13 @ 02:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    10,320

    Re: Nato wary of Russian treaty plan

    Quote Originally Posted by Maximus Zeebra View Post
    I just want to address one thing that you have me misunderstood on, and a few other basic concepts..

    I do NOT defend Russia, and DEFINITELY not Georgia. I only defend Russia when people on this forum attack it from a blind pro-US stand and a blind anti-Russia stand, because the debate as such is very skewed and wrong.
    I am not saying Georgia is angelic. they are in a tough part of the world. However, Georgia does do a better job of preserving the rights of their people better than Russia does. Also, those territories are WITHIN the internationally recognized boundaries of Georgia. Whether you like the President of Georgia or not, this is the fact. ANY state has the right to maintain its territorial integrity. This is a basic principle of state sovereignty. You don't have to be pro-US or anti-Russia to understand this basic fact.

    I just want to find the middle ground, the realistic ground, and debate from there, else its uninteresting. I dont support Russia in many ways, only a few ways, like when they demonstrated against the US and "put their foot" down, and basically told the US they cannot go on like they are without risking nuclear war with Russia.
    Unlike you, I do believe there is a right and wrong. I beleive democratic republics that protect human, civil, legal, and political rights are inherently superior and have more legitimacy than those who don't. You may not like that, but so be it.

    Yes, nuclear war is horrible, but used as a bargaining tool of changing the way US foreign policy has been conducted over the past decade, did gain my approval. Also I do like the intellect of Russian political leadership..
    Putin is a dictator. You may like his "intellect", but it doesn't change the fact that he is a dictator and the people of Russia don't have the freedoms people in the West - or even people in Georgia - have.

    I dont approve of Georgia at all, I think their president is a nutcase on the same line as the Iranian president. If you do not believe me, watch all his English tv appearances and you will undoubtfully see that as well.
    Except that the leader of Georgia has more legitimacy in that his election, while not perfect by any means, was far more democratic than the thug in Iran who was NOT democratically elected.

    The US had no support to invade and conduct war in Iraq, you KNOW this. If you do not know it you watch too much US media, where they try to make it out that its justified with technicalities.
    No support? Some 50 countries supported the war at the time. That is more than a quarter of the world's independent states. The US also had LEGAL backing for the war as well.

    Read Operative Clause 2 of UNSC Resolution 678.

    2. Authorizes Member States co-operating with the Government of Kuwait, unless Iraq on or before 15 January 1991 fully implements, as set forth in paragraph 1 above, the above-mentioned resolutions, to use all necessary means to uphold and implement resolution 660 (1990) and all subsequent relevant resolutions and to restore international peace and security in the area;
    Then read the first perambulatory clause of UNSC Resolution 1441.

    The Security Council,

    Recalling all its previous relevant resolutions, in particular its resolutions 661 (1990) of 6 August 1990, 678 (1990) of 29 November 1990, 686 (1991) of 2 March 1991, 687 (1991) of 3 April 1991, 688 (1991) of 5 April 1991, 707 (1991) of 15 August 1991, 715 (1991) of 11 October 1991, 986 (1995) of 14 April 1995, and 1284 (1999) of 17 December 1999, and all the relevant statements of its President,


    The legal authority is there. There was NO such legal authority for Russia's recent behavior in Georgia.

    If the Iraq war had been approved by the security council, then I am sure France would have come along, do you not think so? Being an ally of the US and having approved the Iraq war in the security council?
    Seee above.

    You know all the controversy and that the US jumped on a technicality and went to war with Iraq, they did NOT have the approval of the security council to do so. If you rewing to the time and the news of the time, you will know this.
    Sure, it was a controversy. It doesn't mean it was legal nor does it mean it wasn't the right thing to do.
    Semper Paratus
    Boston = City of Champions: Bruins 2011; Celtics 2008; Red Sox 2004, 2007; Patriots 2002, 2004, 2005
    Jon Huntsman for President

  8. #48
    Human 2.0
    Maximus Zeebra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Western Europe
    Last Seen
    09-07-17 @ 10:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    6,568

    Re: Nato wary of Russian treaty plan

    Quote Originally Posted by ludahai View Post
    I am not saying Georgia is angelic. they are in a tough part of the world. However, Georgia does do a better job of preserving the rights of their people better than Russia does. Also, those territories are WITHIN the internationally recognized boundaries of Georgia. Whether you like the President of Georgia or not, this is the fact. ANY state has the right to maintain its territorial integrity. This is a basic principle of state sovereignty. You don't have to be pro-US or anti-Russia to understand this basic fact.



    Unlike you, I do believe there is a right and wrong. I beleive democratic republics that protect human, civil, legal, and political rights are inherently superior and have more legitimacy than those who don't. You may not like that, but so be it.



    Putin is a dictator. You may like his "intellect", but it doesn't change the fact that he is a dictator and the people of Russia don't have the freedoms people in the West - or even people in Georgia - have.



    Except that the leader of Georgia has more legitimacy in that his election, while not perfect by any means, was far more democratic than the thug in Iran who was NOT democratically elected.



    No support? Some 50 countries supported the war at the time. That is more than a quarter of the world's independent states. The US also had LEGAL backing for the war as well.

    Read Operative Clause 2 of UNSC Resolution 678.



    Then read the first perambulatory clause of UNSC Resolution 1441.





    The legal authority is there. There was NO such legal authority for Russia's recent behavior in Georgia.



    Seee above.



    Sure, it was a controversy. It doesn't mean it was legal nor does it mean it wasn't the right thing to do.
    You obviousy have been brainwashed by US media. I am sorry to see that, but there was huge controversies surrounding Iraq if you didnt know that. And of the 50 states that supported the US, most of them were Microstates. The US went into Iraq on a technicality they fooled the UN to accept and then used this technicality and lied to fullfill it, and then went to Iraq. thats just the facts.. The US sure thought this out throurogly to avoid any horrible reflection which appears when anyone scratched the propaganda and brainwashing work surrounding Iraq.. So in most peoples view of those Iraq is completely legitimater, which is really a SAD sad thing to see and hear, that people are so blindly stuck in US propaganda. There is NO doubt anymore the US is brainwashing its people, and that many bite.

    You putting all democracies, even the worst above any nation that is not(even the best ones) is just a blind way of looking at the world.


    I do not please to discuss this issue with you since you have no actual memory whatsoever in what happend with Iraq and the whole controversy surrounding it all. Even covered by the relatively blind pro-west BBC.


    PS. I am sure the US will succeed better than NAZI Germany but will eventually be brought down by resistance by the people who arent brainwashed. Bring it on, and let it start.
    Last edited by Maximus Zeebra; 02-04-09 at 06:52 AM.
    Europe is illegally occupied by the US

  9. #49
    Defender of the Faith
    ludahai's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Taichung, Taiwan - 2017 East Asian Games Candidate City
    Last Seen
    07-03-13 @ 02:22 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    10,320

    Re: Nato wary of Russian treaty plan

    Quote Originally Posted by Maximus Zeebra View Post
    You obviousy have been brainwashed by US media. I am sorry to see that, but there was huge controversies surrounding Iraq if you didnt know that. And of the 50 states that supported the US, most of them were Microstates. The US went into Iraq on a technicality they fooled the UN to accept and then used this technicality and lied to fullfill it, and then went to Iraq. thats just the facts..
    I don't even LIVE in the United States. I have spent most of my adult life in Asia.

    You putting all democracies, even the worst above any nation that is not(even the best ones) is just a blind way of looking at the world.
    Please tell me which Democracies are WORSE than Russia, China or the DPRK?

    I am not putting ALL democracies there, but on the whole, a representative democratic republic is a far better form of government than the other ones out there.

    I do not please to discuss this issue with you since you have no actual memory whatsoever in what happend with Iraq and the whole controversy surrounding it all. Even covered by the relatively blind pro-west BBC.
    I DO have a memory of what happened. I. however, have the analytical ability to look at the law and look at the resolutions and conclude that this was NOT an illegal war like many Europeans say it is. You say many on here are blinded by the US media. However, it is in reality quite obvious that you are blinded by leftist European media.
    Semper Paratus
    Boston = City of Champions: Bruins 2011; Celtics 2008; Red Sox 2004, 2007; Patriots 2002, 2004, 2005
    Jon Huntsman for President

  10. #50
    Human 2.0
    Maximus Zeebra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Western Europe
    Last Seen
    09-07-17 @ 10:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    6,568

    Re: Nato wary of Russian treaty plan

    I dont want to discuss this anymore.. You seem to have no comprehension of the reality.
    Europe is illegally occupied by the US

Page 5 of 11 FirstFirst ... 34567 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •