Who are the U.S. AMD in Europe REALLY aimed at?, page 16


Michal 22 December, 2008, 13:50	Dear Sam, I always have previous discussions in my mind and sometimes they mix up - I am not a multitasker as You see even being from the Y generation :P. Belarus can buy whatever it want - that is not really the point. The point is that some people do not understand here that Russia is not responding to offensive system as they claim but to defensive system that has no capability of neither attack nor defend against russian ballistic missles. There is no way practical way that AMD could affect their nuclear detterent force - economic crisis in Russia and falling oil and gas prices will do more to do that. My point is that Russia uses any possbile excuse (AMD is the best for now) to push it`s paranoic anti-west sentiment and justify possible next imperial policy moves just for sure. This is their right but sure there is no obligation to like it. And deployment of SS-26 in Kaliningrad is quite laughable from strictly military sense :). Actually about incoming RS-24 missle (will it be NATO named SS-28 "Superduper"? cool name!) - the more dangerous weapon it is the greater possiblity that it will never be used. I really doubt that it will enter into use that quickly. And returning into MAD isn`t such a bad thing either - after USSR lost in cold war there was a large gap, when Russia as a succesor state declared that it will use nukes in conflict that conventional forces will fail in their tasks (an boy they failed!). This will push back nuclear clock few minutes. permalink quote 0 Michal
Michal 22 December, 2008, 14:50	Dear Nick F. Belarus stated that it will buy Iskanders regardless this was cited by PAP press agence. Lately Belarus posponed this purchase as simply - Belarus is near bankrupcy as a state. I didnt saw this news and I couldn`t find it in the archives - could You give me a link please? Well EU didn`t push any official statement about AMD shield as far as I remember - Sarkozy said something but he corrected himself after, and Berlusconi is a weirdo - he doesn`t count :). Azarbaijan is not a good location since it is too close and reaction time for missle launch will be too short - there is also a risk that Iran will just bomb this base before lauching any ballistic missle. About rejecting proposals - Poland agreed to have russian officials in the AMD base to check what is happening there and Lavrov rejected this offer. It seems both sides doesn`t want to have any agreement on this issue. 900 tanks issue - 900 junk trucks more like. On RT there was a picture of new (propably) T72BM but most T72 tanks in Kaliningrad are just basic T72 without much extras. On photos and satellite shots from machine parks those tanks are rusting, without engines or without towers - they operability is mostly zero, and they are only staying there for spare parts. Better versions like T72M1 that Poland has about 550 are considered junk and hold no military value - only Georgia wants to buy them as they need just any tanks for their army. Lithuania did a good thing, instead of giving those tanks easily so Russia can sell them, they will rot in their garages. And Russia would sell them and for this money buy iskanders to point them at Lithuania - brilliant strategy :). Russia didn`t change a bit for this 20 years (this is pretty naive to think that ) - well maybe it is now much weaker than before. permalink quote 0 Michal
NickF 23 December, 2008, 20:08	Hello Michail, there is no better source of information than the first-hand information! Read very carefully. "Belarus is not yet going to react to missile defense deployment in Europe. First of all, there is no missile defense in Europe, and second, it is big money we don't have yet," Lukashenko (president of Belarus on 19/12/2008). I could find more statements about this issue but this is the most recent & reliable. About article you didn't find... Article: "Green light for American missile plans in Europe" has been posted via link http://www.russiatoday.com/news/news/23040 . Enjoy yourself. It wasn't so hard to find it, just type "nato amd" on the search box, you will see plenty of interesting articles too. Don't be lazy to do so, next time ... Well, of course EU as a whole is in favor of its own defense policy not based on US interests. Conclusions are yours. Italian prime minister S. Berlusconi is an amateur compared to G. Bush, not to mention the "duo fantastico" of Kazinski brothers :))) Of course the location proposed by V. Putin (Azerbaijan) is far better for Russian side as well as majority of EU countries, only US & Poland were opposed, because of their interests I already mentioned in my previous post. Russia couldn't agree on limited only ability to "check what is happening there" in US military base in Poland as proposed by Poland, simply because it is not enough to be assured for its security. And by the way, it is the US that should give assurances to Russia & not Poland. Poland can not assure anything. 900 tanks issue. You must be joking. Are you owner of satellite and can see that satellite pictures, or are you senior intelligence officer, or you just would like things to be like you wish :) ? By withdrawing its 900 tanks, from Kaliningrad, Russia is doing very serious and positive thing, as far as I'm concerned. About money for Iskanders, I prefer not to comment. Are you suggesting that Russia is without money nowadays. LOL Russia changed itself very much, it changed itself, its Cosmo-Theory in the last 20 years, changed itself from communism to capitalism, from one-party system to democracy, from an introvert to an extrovert country ... Time for others to change. There is new reality. Thanks p.s. Just to wish to RT, and also to all RT's community Mary Christmas & Happy New Year. permalink quote 0 NickF
Sam 23 December, 2008, 21:34	Hello Michal, First of all I am sorry but I do not believe the myth that only humans with an XX genotypes can multi task. However I do not see what multi tasking has to do with. However that permalink quote 0 Sam
Margaret 24 December, 2008, 01:52	Regarding NickF's comments about NATO being a US project, I have to say I agree. And, what will happen to NATO when we finally run out of money and decide not to play soldier in the rest of the world any more? (that should be some time in 2009, maybe autumn I think) All of those countries who are so eager to get missiles to ring around Russia will have to buy them and install them without USA help. They will have to fight their own battles, if NATO becomes toothless without US funds. they will have to deal with Russia on their own. Here is a hint for everybody who may be wondering what is the next step: diplomacy is a lot cheaper than missiles. I just wish the current US president had remembered that a few years ago. permalink quote 0 Margaret
siraj 24 December, 2008, 09:46	Recent times Georgian president makes some comments and at the same time he wants to make good cooperation with Russia ? Look at what he is saying. He wants a strong military cooperation with US. He wants to create Georgia as a 'Shield to Europe' to protect himself as well as his Europian friends from Russia. In fact US also wants the same thing and they want to have permanent bases in Georgia or in the Ukraine. In fact the USA wants to consider the Ukraine as a 'Great Wall to Europe' ? permalink quote 0 siraj
Johnny 25 December, 2008, 05:15	I got it, have finally figured it out. The banks that own the FED are getting Bush to put missiles in Poland because they control the banks there as well. This is because when the USA figures out just how badly the FED bankers have pressed Americans, the USA is going to blow the UK bankers off the face of the earth. So Poland is there to protect Europe permalink quote 0 Johnny
Michal 29 December, 2008, 17:38	Dear Sam, I wrote about multitasking because I as You see am writing in few topics and sometimes I confuse to whom I am responding (and about XX chromosomes I understand the irony :p). Going to the point - this is physically impossible to update this kind of facility in ability to stop advanced ICMBs like russian. You would need a radar powerful enough to detect small fast moving abjects and tens of thousands of interceptor missles - and even that would not guarantee success. And as far as we both know russian strategic missle forces are partly mobile, and immobile active silos are far beyond possible AMD range. I really see no danger to russian nuclear deterent. Bigger threat to russian military is one patriot battery and american presence here - and this is the real issue, not any deterent bogus. This is sad that crisis struck UK so bad - in Poland we can`t really feel it yet - everything is mostly the same only euro and dollar went up. And what chain broke? ASDA the "fav of chav"? ;) I am not really whining much about iskanders - I am whining more that Russia as always keeps threatening and intimidating whatever is done (I gave examples before). Compared to me on authority level nobody in Poland really cares - maybe You heard quotations from polish prime minister "this happens from time to time", "we got used to it", "we heard it so many times that now nobody even cares". And why Iskanders are big fat bloke that nobody in NATO cares - there are five major reasons: 1. they are not even produced yet - RF has only one not fully functional battery, it will take years to produce form and locate them 2. usage of iskanders in georgian conflict was a complete failure 3. there is lack of proper high resolution GPS system that could home those missles (GLONAS didn`t help much or at all RF forces in Georgia) 4. Kaliningrad is landlocked, airlocked and almost sealocked (with exception of small strip) by NATO countries, transporting ten batteries will be costly and will take long time 5. Kaliningrad is very small and all military objects and equipment positions are not far from NATO boundaries, those could be easily detected and destroyed if there is such need - iskanders are easy targets for polish cruise missles not to mention artillery that is stacked at those borders permalink quote 0 Michal
Michal 29 December, 2008, 18:03	Dear Nick About Belarus - I am now pretty confused as Lukaszenko changes his mind every time he gives a new interview and everytime he meets with Putin. I have sources (in polish language) from 2006 and 2008 but from the first few days of december. I don`t have any more recent source than Yours so I guess Lukaszenko, changed his mind again. I knew those news but I meant really these: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081203/ap_on_re_eu/eu_nato_russia Much more important recent and were not published on RT. There are already EU armed forces which I think should be developed but not at the cost of NATO, as it is still the gurantee of independency for some countries. Azarbaijan location was not better for the reason I mentioned sooner. And this was joint US & Poland proposal (my bad) as I remember this infuriated Lavrov itself - he wanted to speak with US directly, not with some temporary rebel province of the almighty Russian Empire ;). And what do You propose that could Russia more assured? Give Poland to King Medvedev :p? The issue of 900 tanks - I do not own my own satellite (but I would like to ;) - but just look how many kilometers is from polish border to russian military instalations - Kaliningrad is more like a big military base itself so chances to see some tanks or other vehicles by normal civilian observation equipment is quite big. Russia has money but if more then merrier - especially as the location and introduction of this equipment will be quite costly. Well for me Russia didn`t change as much as it is described in wishful thinking dominating the West. For me it is still a country that developes itself at the expense of other weaker countries and will do that as it is it`s legacy to do so. permalink quote 0 Michal
Ivor 1 January, 2009, 17:35	the american missiles are pointing at Russia and I hope the russians know it. the americans wanted to invade Russia in 1945 after all what the Russian people went through to win the war but were scared to invade. To the Russian people please keep looking over your shoulder. permalink quote 0 Ivor
Sam 3 January, 2009, 10:01	Hello Michal I would advice you read carefully a post on which you want to reply to and then make it. That way you would not get confused. So you need radar for the ABMs to be effective? So what is considered for the Czech Republic if not a radar? So what stops that being upgraded as to reach your specifications? So the economic meltdown is not yet affecting Poland. That explains why the millions of Poles that flooded the UK when the economy was better are now leaving the sinking ship. Nice to know when you are important to the people you consider friends. As for Kaliningrad and the SS 26Ms, I will comment to each point you made numbered as you did. 1. The SS 26M are not yet produced?? They had been in service with the Russian army since 2006. There two versions M-For Russian armed forced, range 400km upgradeable to 500km (but limited to 400km in keeping with INF) E-export type range 280km and many countries are showing interest in it. 2. Usage in Georgia conflict was a failure? But you said that they are yet to be produced? So which is it? 3. By the way you are going, one would think that Russia lost the war with Georgia. Funny I was thinking they achieved their military objective in less than five days. 4. Kaliningrad is landlocked but not air or sea locked in any way. They do border international waters. In fact none of their military air or naval traffic enters any other countries territory on its way to Kaliningrad. They are also very near to the mainland. I put it to you that it would not be much of a logistic problem to move military to Kaliningrad, no more then anywhere else in Russia. 5. They border NATO countries. EXACTLY!! Why do you think they are treating to move military there in the first place. To be closer to any planned ABMs.Sorry to have to tell you this, but the Polish military never was since the middle ages and never will be any match to that of the Russians. Do not think your artillery or missiles will scare them much. In a nuclear exchange situation, Both Russia and USA will attempt to disable as much strategic infrastructure as possible where ever they are. Poland has kept itself on the firing line by planning to host some of this infrastructure. Rather then complaining about Russia, you should be asking your government on why they think that for a few bucks more and to keep the yanks happy, they should put you in this situation. Now my Polish friend, in the past you requested I provide links to my claims which I did. I requested exactly the same from you to back you claims which are usually twisted and you totally ignored me. You even manage to contradict yourself in the same paragraph. If you like to share with me another interesting “fact” please provide links to back your claim. I would like to discuss an issue and not to correct it. I would not be replying to any of your comments that are not backed by a link to that claim. Have a good year. permalink quote 0 Sam
Michal 4 January, 2009, 12:51	Hello in the New Year Sam! I once was confused - I had too many things on my head at that time, I think it will not happen again. Construction of a radar with this power magnitude to detect full scale ballistic retaliation could be physically impossible with current technology - just look at the parameters of current radars that are equpped on systems that could possibly intercept ballistic missles. There is not much to upgrade a radar system in the future with such purpose other than increasing its size and power which also have limits - cost of a mechanism to detect full scale retaliation and hundreds thousands of interceptor silos would be a strain to whole US budget not only military. I think that it will not really affect Poland (this could be wishful thinking), because the current growth is a result of internal matters - higher competition, greater work efficency, change of work culture than foreign matters. Also to lost something You must first have it. About immigration - do You think that for example Indians will still be in the UK if India will become a better place to live? I always liked Your realistic point but here it is quite naive to think that people who are job immigrants will stay. Also most people who left Poland (not all of course) in favor of UK are those who couldn`t fit into new market realities in Poland - OECD recently stated that Poland has one of the most efficent workers in Europe (I couldn`t find those stats) and people that couldn`t join the rrat race just left for more forgiving markets. I will also give answers to points just for the clearance of the whole post: 1. I know this (wiki) - they are not yet produced for both Kaliningrad base and foreign demands, they were in the past but the production was halted, and to restore production of any type military equipment You need time. 2. As I wrote before they are not yet produced one not fully operational battery exists. 3. I wrote that use of this missle in Georgia was a failure - the operation commenced by russian military was a moderate success (but successs) in my opinion - both sides made many mistakes and showed their weakness in few apects. 4. But it is not comparable in costs and operational effort to what was before 1999 and 2007. Previously military transports could be (and they were) moved by roads, railways and air directly through lithuanian territory. 5. Well You propably forgot that Poland kicked Russia in 1919-1921 but let`s get to the point - there is no reason to scare Russia as it will always be a paranoid country - also most Poles like Russians why we would like to scare them? Polish artillery is not to scare anyone but to fill their operational duty which is capable to do. About being on the firing line - Poland always was and is going to be - in Warsaw Pact before and in NATO now so nothing really changed - we just have terrible neighbours :D. I will check Your previous responses and try to put some links in the next post. permalink quote 0 Michal
Michal 4 January, 2009, 16:54	Dear Sam, I was trying to find a nice compact source about russian strategic arsenal and I found one - most publications I have are polish sources, but I found something with nice nymber of links below here it its: http://thebulletin.metapress.com/content/t2j78437407v3qv1/fulltext.pdf Look at the page 56 in ICBM notes how many warheads are now deployed (approx). As You can see this number is stated as every ICBM would be MIRVed - which they are not as we both know. Now just count with simple mathematics how many warheads are deployed if there is only one warhead per ICBM (or even half of the warheads per ICBM). There are also less SS-18 and SS-19 than stated here as they are being converted into space rockets and Ukraine could not enchance operability of SS-18 missles due recent political issues. As wiki states there will be 40 SS-18 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SS-18) and 94 SS-19 left (because 32 of 126 never entered service) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SS-19) and warfare.ru which is much more professional states even less SS-19 (http://warfare.ru/?catid=265&linkid=2310) but more SS-18 without information which of them were converted to launch platforms, and how many are operable in their silos. If You are interested in polish sources also I would be glad - if You need more information just remind me. permalink quote 0 Michal
Sam 5 January, 2009, 19:58	Dear Michal, still can’t see how you can think the SS-26 was a failure when every expert in the world thinks is one of the best surface to surface missiles in the world. Let’s read what the defence update website has to say about it http://defense-update.com/products/i/iskander.htm Extract: “The Iskander Tactical Missile System is considered to be among the most advanced surface / surface missiles available today” So where is your link that it was a failure? You now say they are not produced for Kaliningrad demand.Thats not what you said before. Well the ABMs that are going to be in Poland are not yet produced too. Guess it would take the Russians about the same time to manufacture the ones they need for Kaliningrad. Thank you for your link which totally contradicts your first statement that the Russian federation has only 1000 warheads. I do not need to count, read the first page of the link that you yourself had posted. As your link points out Russia has the largest nuclear arsenal with 5,800 operational warheads and another 8,500 in storage despite decommissioning 1000 warheads this year alone. No thanks, not interested in Polish sources, as you can see I do not bring out Russian sources for the simple reason that they maybe biased on the topic. Surely you can find other sources to support your claims other then polish. permalink quote 0 Sam
ahmed333 6 February, 2009, 13:46	It is amied at Russia . just to suround Russia from every where in its borders to disable the Russian military capabiliteis and expand the NATO in regions where Russian interests exist permalink quote 0 ahmed333
David 8 February, 2009, 11:12	The USA and England have been responsible for destroying a country (Iraq) and hanging a man (Hussain) for ALLEDGEDLY having weapons of mass destruction, BUT these two very same countries are forging ahead with their own weapons of mass destruction in an attempt force countries, like Russia, to kneel to their very commands. Just who are USA and England to continue to dictate to Russia and others when they have not got their own houses in order. Russia has every right to defend itself and by installing a similar curtain along USA's very own border, well done. Perhaps this move by Russia has made USA rethink on their tactics. permalink quote 0 David
Sevodnya_Net 9 February, 2009, 20:01	David Saddam Hussain was hanged (unjustifiably in my opinion as I don't support the death penalty) by his own people for crimes of murder against them, not, as it happens, for having weapons of mass destruction, which as we all know now he didn't have (unless you count chemical weapons etc etc.). The sad fact is that the technology for WMD exists. It cannot be undone. All one can try and do is take steps to ensure that they do not fall into the hands of those who would use them pre-emptively. Iran, for example (and perhaps helpfully honestly) has openly threatened to do so against Israel. That should be a worry to all civilised people. permalink quote 0 Sevodnya_Net
Sam 10 February, 2009, 09:03	Sevodnya_Net posted: “for having weapons of mass destruction, which as we all know now he didn't have (unless you count chemical weapons etc etc.). “ Chemical weapons are also included in the category of WMD along with biological and nuclear. He did have them before but not at the time of the invasion as they had been destroyed.The reason for invading Iraq no longer existed. However Sadam was executed by the Iraqi courts for his involvement in massacres including Halabja where he used a chemical agent in 1988. The question should also be who sold it to him? How come they remained unpunished? http://www.commondreams.org/headlines02/0908-08.htm We should not use the excuse that we did not know what they are been used for. It turns out that after the massacre of Halabja which killed 5000 people, shipments continued to arrive from the US. permalink quote 0 Sam

Michal 22 December, 2008, 13:50

Dear Sam, I always have previous discussions in my mind and sometimes they mix up - I am not a multitasker as You see even being from the Y generation :P. Belarus can buy whatever it want - that is not really the point. The point is that some people do not understand here that Russia is not responding to offensive system as they claim but to defensive system that has no capability of neither attack nor defend against russian ballistic missles. There is no way practical way that AMD could affect their nuclear detterent force - economic crisis in Russia and falling oil and gas prices will do more to do that. My point is that Russia uses any possbile excuse (AMD is the best for now) to push it`s paranoic anti-west sentiment and justify possible next imperial policy moves just for sure. This is their right but sure there is no obligation to like it. And deployment of SS-26 in Kaliningrad is quite laughable from strictly military sense :). Actually about incoming RS-24 missle (will it be NATO named SS-28 "Superduper"? cool name!) - the more dangerous weapon it is the greater possiblity that it will never be used. I really doubt that it will enter into use that quickly. And returning into MAD isn`t such a bad thing either - after USSR lost in cold war there was a large gap, when Russia as a succesor state declared that it will use nukes in conflict that conventional forces will fail in their tasks (an boy they failed!). This will push back nuclear clock few minutes.

permalink quote Michal

Michal 22 December, 2008, 14:50

Dear Nick F. Belarus stated that it will buy Iskanders regardless this was cited by PAP press agence. Lately Belarus posponed this purchase as simply - Belarus is near bankrupcy as a state. I didnt saw this news and I couldn`t find it in the archives - could You give me a link please? Well EU didn`t push any official statement about AMD shield as far as I remember - Sarkozy said something but he corrected himself after, and Berlusconi is a weirdo - he doesn`t count :). Azarbaijan is not a good location since it is too close and reaction time for missle launch will be too short - there is also a risk that Iran will just bomb this base before lauching any ballistic missle. About rejecting proposals - Poland agreed to have russian officials in the AMD base to check what is happening there and Lavrov rejected this offer. It seems both sides doesn`t want to have any agreement on this issue. 900 tanks issue - 900 junk trucks more like. On RT there was a picture of new (propably) T72BM but most T72 tanks in Kaliningrad are just basic T72 without much extras. On photos and satellite shots from machine parks those tanks are rusting, without engines or without towers - they operability is mostly zero, and they are only staying there for spare parts. Better versions like T72M1 that Poland has about 550 are considered junk and hold no military value - only Georgia wants to buy them as they need just any tanks for their army. Lithuania did a good thing, instead of giving those tanks easily so Russia can sell them, they will rot in their garages. And Russia would sell them and for this money buy iskanders to point them at Lithuania - brilliant strategy :). Russia didn`t change a bit for this 20 years (this is pretty naive to think that ) - well maybe it is now much weaker than before.

permalink quote Michal

NickF 23 December, 2008, 20:08

Hello Michail, there is no better source of information than the first-hand information! Read very carefully. "Belarus is not yet going to react to missile defense deployment in Europe. First of all, there is no missile defense in Europe, and second, it is big money we don't have yet," Lukashenko (president of Belarus on 19/12/2008). I could find more statements about this issue but this is the most recent & reliable. About article you didn't find... Article: "Green light for American missile plans in Europe" has been posted via link http://www.russiatoday.com/news/news/23040 . Enjoy yourself. It wasn't so hard to find it, just type "nato amd" on the search box, you will see plenty of interesting articles too. Don't be lazy to do so, next time ... Well, of course EU as a whole is in favor of its own defense policy not based on US interests. Conclusions are yours. Italian prime minister S. Berlusconi is an amateur compared to G. Bush, not to mention the "duo fantastico" of Kazinski brothers :))) Of course the location proposed by V. Putin (Azerbaijan) is far better for Russian side as well as majority of EU countries, only US & Poland were opposed, because of their interests I already mentioned in my previous post. Russia couldn't agree on limited only ability to "check what is happening there" in US military base in Poland as proposed by Poland, simply because it is not enough to be assured for its security. And by the way, it is the US that should give assurances to Russia & not Poland. Poland can not assure anything. 900 tanks issue. You must be joking. Are you owner of satellite and can see that satellite pictures, or are you senior intelligence officer, or you just would like things to be like you wish :) ? By withdrawing its 900 tanks, from Kaliningrad, Russia is doing very serious and positive thing, as far as I'm concerned. About money for Iskanders, I prefer not to comment. Are you suggesting that Russia is without money nowadays. LOL Russia changed itself very much, it changed itself, its Cosmo-Theory in the last 20 years, changed itself from communism to capitalism, from one-party system to democracy, from an introvert to an extrovert country ... Time for others to change. There is new reality. Thanks p.s. Just to wish to RT, and also to all RT's community Mary Christmas & Happy New Year.

permalink quote NickF

Sam 23 December, 2008, 21:34

Hello Michal, First of all I am sorry but I do not believe the myth that only humans with an XX genotypes can multi task. However I do not see what multi tasking has to do with. However that

permalink quote Sam

Margaret 24 December, 2008, 01:52

Regarding NickF's comments about NATO being a US project, I have to say I agree. And, what will happen to NATO when we finally run out of money and decide not to play soldier in the rest of the world any more? (that should be some time in 2009, maybe autumn I think) All of those countries who are so eager to get missiles to ring around Russia will have to buy them and install them without USA help. They will have to fight their own battles, if NATO becomes toothless without US funds. they will have to deal with Russia on their own. Here is a hint for everybody who may be wondering what is the next step: diplomacy is a lot cheaper than missiles. I just wish the current US president had remembered that a few years ago.

permalink quote Margaret

siraj 24 December, 2008, 09:46

Recent times Georgian president makes some comments and at the same time he wants to make good cooperation with Russia ? Look at what he is saying. He wants a strong military cooperation with US. He wants to create Georgia as a 'Shield to Europe' to protect himself as well as his Europian friends from Russia. In fact US also wants the same thing and they want to have permanent bases in Georgia or in the Ukraine. In fact the USA wants to consider the Ukraine as a 'Great Wall to Europe' ?

permalink quote siraj

Johnny 25 December, 2008, 05:15

I got it, have finally figured it out. The banks that own the FED are getting Bush to put missiles in Poland because they control the banks there as well. This is because when the USA figures out just how badly the FED bankers have pressed Americans, the USA is going to blow the UK bankers off the face of the earth. So Poland is there to protect Europe

permalink quote Johnny

Michal 29 December, 2008, 17:38

Dear Sam, I wrote about multitasking because I as You see am writing in few topics and sometimes I confuse to whom I am responding (and about XX chromosomes I understand the irony :p). Going to the point - this is physically impossible to update this kind of facility in ability to stop advanced ICMBs like russian. You would need a radar powerful enough to detect small fast moving abjects and tens of thousands of interceptor missles - and even that would not guarantee success. And as far as we both know russian strategic missle forces are partly mobile, and immobile active silos are far beyond possible AMD range. I really see no danger to russian nuclear deterent. Bigger threat to russian military is one patriot battery and american presence here - and this is the real issue, not any deterent bogus. This is sad that crisis struck UK so bad - in Poland we can`t really feel it yet - everything is mostly the same only euro and dollar went up. And what chain broke? ASDA the "fav of chav"? ;) I am not really whining much about iskanders - I am whining more that Russia as always keeps threatening and intimidating whatever is done (I gave examples before). Compared to me on authority level nobody in Poland really cares - maybe You heard quotations from polish prime minister "this happens from time to time", "we got used to it", "we heard it so many times that now nobody even cares". And why Iskanders are big fat bloke that nobody in NATO cares - there are five major reasons: 1. they are not even produced yet - RF has only one not fully functional battery, it will take years to produce form and locate them 2. usage of iskanders in georgian conflict was a complete failure 3. there is lack of proper high resolution GPS system that could home those missles (GLONAS didn`t help much or at all RF forces in Georgia) 4. Kaliningrad is landlocked, airlocked and almost sealocked (with exception of small strip) by NATO countries, transporting ten batteries will be costly and will take long time 5. Kaliningrad is very small and all military objects and equipment positions are not far from NATO boundaries, those could be easily detected and destroyed if there is such need - iskanders are easy targets for polish cruise missles not to mention artillery that is stacked at those borders

permalink quote Michal

Michal 29 December, 2008, 18:03

Dear Nick About Belarus - I am now pretty confused as Lukaszenko changes his mind every time he gives a new interview and everytime he meets with Putin. I have sources (in polish language) from 2006 and 2008 but from the first few days of december. I don`t have any more recent source than Yours so I guess Lukaszenko, changed his mind again. I knew those news but I meant really these: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081203/ap_on_re_eu/eu_nato_russia Much more important recent and were not published on RT. There are already EU armed forces which I think should be developed but not at the cost of NATO, as it is still the gurantee of independency for some countries. Azarbaijan location was not better for the reason I mentioned sooner. And this was joint US & Poland proposal (my bad) as I remember this infuriated Lavrov itself - he wanted to speak with US directly, not with some temporary rebel province of the almighty Russian Empire ;). And what do You propose that could Russia more assured? Give Poland to King Medvedev :p? The issue of 900 tanks - I do not own my own satellite (but I would like to ;) - but just look how many kilometers is from polish border to russian military instalations - Kaliningrad is more like a big military base itself so chances to see some tanks or other vehicles by normal civilian observation equipment is quite big. Russia has money but if more then merrier - especially as the location and introduction of this equipment will be quite costly. Well for me Russia didn`t change as much as it is described in wishful thinking dominating the West. For me it is still a country that developes itself at the expense of other weaker countries and will do that as it is it`s legacy to do so.

permalink quote Michal

Ivor 1 January, 2009, 17:35

the american missiles are pointing at Russia and I hope the russians know it. the americans wanted to invade Russia in 1945 after all what the Russian people went through to win the war but were scared to invade. To the Russian people please keep looking over your shoulder.

permalink quote Ivor

Sam 3 January, 2009, 10:01

Hello Michal I would advice you read carefully a post on which you want to reply to and then make it. That way you would not get confused. So you need radar for the ABMs to be effective? So what is considered for the Czech Republic if not a radar? So what stops that being upgraded as to reach your specifications? So the economic meltdown is not yet affecting Poland. That explains why the millions of Poles that flooded the UK when the economy was better are now leaving the sinking ship. Nice to know when you are important to the people you consider friends. As for Kaliningrad and the SS 26Ms, I will comment to each point you made numbered as you did. 1. The SS 26M are not yet produced?? They had been in service with the Russian army since 2006. There two versions M-For Russian armed forced, range 400km upgradeable to 500km (but limited to 400km in keeping with INF) E-export type range 280km and many countries are showing interest in it. 2. Usage in Georgia conflict was a failure? But you said that they are yet to be produced? So which is it? 3. By the way you are going, one would think that Russia lost the war with Georgia. Funny I was thinking they achieved their military objective in less than five days. 4. Kaliningrad is landlocked but not air or sea locked in any way. They do border international waters. In fact none of their military air or naval traffic enters any other countries territory on its way to Kaliningrad. They are also very near to the mainland. I put it to you that it would not be much of a logistic problem to move military to Kaliningrad, no more then anywhere else in Russia. 5. They border NATO countries. EXACTLY!! Why do you think they are treating to move military there in the first place. To be closer to any planned ABMs.Sorry to have to tell you this, but the Polish military never was since the middle ages and never will be any match to that of the Russians. Do not think your artillery or missiles will scare them much. In a nuclear exchange situation, Both Russia and USA will attempt to disable as much strategic infrastructure as possible where ever they are. Poland has kept itself on the firing line by planning to host some of this infrastructure. Rather then complaining about Russia, you should be asking your government on why they think that for a few bucks more and to keep the yanks happy, they should put you in this situation. Now my Polish friend, in the past you requested I provide links to my claims which I did. I requested exactly the same from you to back you claims which are usually twisted and you totally ignored me. You even manage to contradict yourself in the same paragraph. If you like to share with me another interesting “fact” please provide links to back your claim. I would like to discuss an issue and not to correct it. I would not be replying to any of your comments that are not backed by a link to that claim. Have a good year.

permalink quote Sam

Michal 4 January, 2009, 12:51

Hello in the New Year Sam! I once was confused - I had too many things on my head at that time, I think it will not happen again. Construction of a radar with this power magnitude to detect full scale ballistic retaliation could be physically impossible with current technology - just look at the parameters of current radars that are equpped on systems that could possibly intercept ballistic missles. There is not much to upgrade a radar system in the future with such purpose other than increasing its size and power which also have limits - cost of a mechanism to detect full scale retaliation and hundreds thousands of interceptor silos would be a strain to whole US budget not only military. I think that it will not really affect Poland (this could be wishful thinking), because the current growth is a result of internal matters - higher competition, greater work efficency, change of work culture than foreign matters. Also to lost something You must first have it. About immigration - do You think that for example Indians will still be in the UK if India will become a better place to live? I always liked Your realistic point but here it is quite naive to think that people who are job immigrants will stay. Also most people who left Poland (not all of course) in favor of UK are those who couldn`t fit into new market realities in Poland - OECD recently stated that Poland has one of the most efficent workers in Europe (I couldn`t find those stats) and people that couldn`t join the rrat race just left for more forgiving markets. I will also give answers to points just for the clearance of the whole post: 1. I know this (wiki) - they are not yet produced for both Kaliningrad base and foreign demands, they were in the past but the production was halted, and to restore production of any type military equipment You need time. 2. As I wrote before they are not yet produced one not fully operational battery exists. 3. I wrote that use of this missle in Georgia was a failure - the operation commenced by russian military was a moderate success (but successs) in my opinion - both sides made many mistakes and showed their weakness in few apects. 4. But it is not comparable in costs and operational effort to what was before 1999 and 2007. Previously military transports could be (and they were) moved by roads, railways and air directly through lithuanian territory. 5. Well You propably forgot that Poland kicked Russia in 1919-1921 but let`s get to the point - there is no reason to scare Russia as it will always be a paranoid country - also most Poles like Russians why we would like to scare them? Polish artillery is not to scare anyone but to fill their operational duty which is capable to do. About being on the firing line - Poland always was and is going to be - in Warsaw Pact before and in NATO now so nothing really changed - we just have terrible neighbours :D. I will check Your previous responses and try to put some links in the next post.

permalink quote Michal

Michal 4 January, 2009, 16:54

Dear Sam, I was trying to find a nice compact source about russian strategic arsenal and I found one - most publications I have are polish sources, but I found something with nice nymber of links below here it its: http://thebulletin.metapress.com/content/t2j78437407v3qv1/fulltext.pdf Look at the page 56 in ICBM notes how many warheads are now deployed (approx). As You can see this number is stated as every ICBM would be MIRVed - which they are not as we both know. Now just count with simple mathematics how many warheads are deployed if there is only one warhead per ICBM (or even half of the warheads per ICBM). There are also less SS-18 and SS-19 than stated here as they are being converted into space rockets and Ukraine could not enchance operability of SS-18 missles due recent political issues. As wiki states there will be 40 SS-18 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SS-18) and 94 SS-19 left (because 32 of 126 never entered service) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SS-19) and warfare.ru which is much more professional states even less SS-19 (http://warfare.ru/?catid=265&linkid=2310) but more SS-18 without information which of them were converted to launch platforms, and how many are operable in their silos. If You are interested in polish sources also I would be glad - if You need more information just remind me.

permalink quote Michal

Sam 5 January, 2009, 19:58

Dear Michal, still can’t see how you can think the SS-26 was a failure when every expert in the world thinks is one of the best surface to surface missiles in the world. Let’s read what the defence update website has to say about it http://defense-update.com/products/i/iskander.htm Extract: “The Iskander Tactical Missile System is considered to be among the most advanced surface / surface missiles available today” So where is your link that it was a failure? You now say they are not produced for Kaliningrad demand.Thats not what you said before. Well the ABMs that are going to be in Poland are not yet produced too. Guess it would take the Russians about the same time to manufacture the ones they need for Kaliningrad. Thank you for your link which totally contradicts your first statement that the Russian federation has only 1000 warheads. I do not need to count, read the first page of the link that you yourself had posted. As your link points out Russia has the largest nuclear arsenal with 5,800 operational warheads and another 8,500 in storage despite decommissioning 1000 warheads this year alone. No thanks, not interested in Polish sources, as you can see I do not bring out Russian sources for the simple reason that they maybe biased on the topic. Surely you can find other sources to support your claims other then polish.

permalink quote Sam

ahmed333 6 February, 2009, 13:46

It is amied at Russia . just to suround Russia from every where in its borders to disable the Russian military capabiliteis and expand the NATO in regions where Russian interests exist

permalink quote ahmed333

David 8 February, 2009, 11:12

The USA and England have been responsible for destroying a country (Iraq) and hanging a man (Hussain) for ALLEDGEDLY having weapons of mass destruction, BUT these two very same countries are forging ahead with their own weapons of mass destruction in an attempt force countries, like Russia, to kneel to their very commands. Just who are USA and England to continue to dictate to Russia and others when they have not got their own houses in order. Russia has every right to defend itself and by installing a similar curtain along USA's very own border, well done. Perhaps this move by Russia has made USA rethink on their tactics.

permalink quote David

Sevodnya_Net 9 February, 2009, 20:01

David Saddam Hussain was hanged (unjustifiably in my opinion as I don't support the death penalty) by his own people for crimes of murder against them, not, as it happens, for having weapons of mass destruction, which as we all know now he didn't have (unless you count chemical weapons etc etc.). The sad fact is that the technology for WMD exists. It cannot be undone. All one can try and do is take steps to ensure that they do not fall into the hands of those who would use them pre-emptively. Iran, for example (and perhaps helpfully honestly) has openly threatened to do so against Israel. That should be a worry to all civilised people.

permalink quote Sevodnya_Net

Sam 10 February, 2009, 09:03

Sevodnya_Net posted: “for having weapons of mass destruction, which as we all know now he didn't have (unless you count chemical weapons etc etc.). “ Chemical weapons are also included in the category of WMD along with biological and nuclear. He did have them before but not at the time of the invasion as they had been destroyed.The reason for invading Iraq no longer existed. However Sadam was executed by the Iraqi courts for his involvement in massacres including Halabja where he used a chemical agent in 1988. The question should also be who sold it to him? How come they remained unpunished? http://www.commondreams.org/headlines02/0908-08.htm We should not use the excuse that we did not know what they are been used for. It turns out that after the massacre of Halabja which killed 5000 people, shipments continued to arrive from the US.

permalink quote Sam

Name*
Country, City
Valid e-mail*
Text*
Enter digits below*

	*Required fields