PDA

View Full Version : Russia threatens to Nuke Poland


SilentScope001
02-20-2007, 01:04 PM
Place this in the werid news section, but it is true.

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1591504,00.html

MOSCOW ó Poland and the Czech Republic risk being targeted by Russian missiles if they agree to host a proposed U.S. missile defense system, a top Russian general warned Monday. Russia has been increasingly bellicose in its response to the U.S. proposal to build the missile defense system in Eastern Europe. President Vladimir Putin has said he does not trust U.S. claims that the system would be to guard the American East Coast and Europe from missiles launched from "rogue nations" in the Middle East.

Gen. Nikolai Solovtsov, head of Russia's missile forces, said the system would upset strategic stability. It would be the first such site in Europe.

"If the governments of Poland and the Czech Republic take such a step ... the Strategic Missile Forces will be capable of targeting these facilities if a relevant decision is made," he said.

On Monday, Czech Premier Mirek Topolanek said his country and Poland were in favor of the U.S. missile defense proposal.

"I think it is in our joint interest to negotiate this initiative and to build in our area the missile defense," Topolanek said after talks in Warsaw with Polish Prime Minister Jaroslaw Kaczynski.

The bases in Poland and the Czech Republic would be designed to intercept missiles being developed by Iran, U.S. Air Force Lt. Gen. Henry A. Obering, director of the Missile Defense Agency, said last month. Two other bases in Alaska and California would protect the U.S. from threats from North Korea, Obering said.

Kaczynski brushed aside Russia's fears, saying "the missile defense is not directed against any normal state."

"Any statement suggesting that the missile defense would change the alignment of forces in Europe is a misunderstanding," he said. "This truth is being conveyed to our partners in the west and the east."

State Department spokesman Edgar Vasquez said Monday the United States has worked closely with the Czech and Polish governments to develop the missile defense system and that it was in no way directed at Russia.

"We have offered to cooperate with Russia on missile defense because we believe we face a common threat emanating from the Middle East as well as other areas," Vasquez said.

Solovtsov said he was concerned that the United States, which plans to deploy 10 interceptors in Poland, could boost those numbers in the future.

The general also said it would take Russia less than six years to build upgraded versions of medium range missiles if Moscow decided to pull out of a 1987 agreement with the U.S. that banned their deployment.

"It is not difficult to restore their production," Solovtsov told a news conference. "The missiles were dismantled, but the production technology has remained."

Russian military officials have said Moscow's decision to pull out of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty would depend on whether the United States goes ahead with the missile defense plan. The key arms control agreement was negotiated between Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev and former President Ronald Reagan.

At a European security conference earlier this month, Putin said the treaty was outdated, and that many nations had since developed the medium-range missiles eliminated by Russia and the United States.

Putin has warned that Russia could respond to the deployment of U.S. missile defense in Europe by building new, more efficient weapons. He had previously boasted that Russia was developing new missiles that would be impossible to intercept.

Solovtsov said Russia would continue gradually replacing Soviet-built intercontinental ballistic missiles with new Topol-M missiles and would fully rearm around 2016 while maintaining levels under a 2002 arms control treaty signed by Putin and President Bush. That treaty obliges both sides to cut their strategic nuclear weapons by about two-thirds by 2012.

"It's possible to deploy such weapons shortly if the situation requires that," Solovtsov said.

No, it's unlikely that Russia would ACTUALLY attack Poland and Czech Republic, but I'm still a bit worried. I thought the Cold War ended in 1991. Regardless, this news is good to know. Pay attention to these small stories, they often times are more important than the ones you hear today.

EDIT: Er...this is supposed to belong to Kavar's Corner, and not here. Sorry. Can a mod move it please?

EDIT2: Here is a pro-Russian view of the current crisis, if you are interested.
http://en.rian.ru/russia/20070220/61029102.html

Jae Onasi
02-20-2007, 01:09 PM
Moving to Kavar's Corner.... :)

Ztalker
02-20-2007, 02:32 PM
Meh...Russia can't do that in the first place.

We know Poetin doesn't have THAT much support in his country. At least not enough to start a possible war.
And since Poland is part of the European Union now, they face the wrath of some of the best equiped armies of the world. Not to mention the special forces of the British (The highly-skilled SAS), the superbly drilled Germans, the French with their nice Famas-rifles, etc etc.

But I find it strange that the Russians try to 'manipulate' Europe this way. They have no authority over Poland and the Czech Republic :)

Ctrl Alt Del
02-20-2007, 02:35 PM
Wow. That was a too strong reaction. Supporting Iran nuclear project is one thing, now, threatning a foreing country, with full soverignity over his territory is... Nah, this is just not serious. And a uncalled for threat. No fun.

HerbieZ
02-20-2007, 02:44 PM
No, it's unlikely that Russia would ACTUALLY attack Poland and Czech Republic, but I'm still a bit worried. I thought the Cold War ended in 1991. Regardless, this news is good to know. Pay attention to these small stories, they often times are more important than the ones you hear today.



If it worries you then why pay attention to it? Yes these small stories often mean bigger things alot of the times they are the ramblings of some attention seeking reporter or a bored news agency. The Cold War did end. If you are genuinely worried about Russia attacking Poland then do something about it. More than half of us are not in a position to do anything about it as it is.The threat is pretty minor as guess what.. Russia could attack anyone.. at any second! People are just worried about Russia because of some one sided track record, when in reality if you have ever been to the place then you know it's not full of mines, gunracks and nukes pointing every-which-way but America.

Germany once tried to blitz us, we don't still hold them under the crosshair. Germany is one of the most technologically advanced countries in the world and since 1940 it has changed beyond all recognition. Things change in time, America (or it's government) needs to pull it's head out of the sand and see Russia in a 21st century light. Im not saying this story is not true but i guarantee you it has been changed to make it look worse than it actually is.

I just think this is yet again a typical editorial view on Russia.

This is by no means a jab at America or any American forumites i love America like the big uncle it is with aunty England. :)

Darth InSidious
02-20-2007, 02:58 PM
Unlikely? Hah!

Typical of Russia at the moment. A cynic might say that since communism didn't win 'em the world, now The Party are trying plain old capitalist methods of buying, stealing and threatening...

I think Putin wouldn't hesitate to use the nuke if it would make people cower from Russia.

Also, while our armed forces are some of the best in the world, the British government is about as useful as the worst elements of Neville Chamberlain and Tullius Cicero in a single body - sheer vacillating idiocy.They would quite happily back down to Russia, and ignore the parallels with 60 years ago - because, according to New Labour , nothing over 20 years ago is of any relevance to the modern world...

SilentScope001
02-20-2007, 04:05 PM
I just think this is yet again a typical editorial view on Russia.

It came from Time Maganize, so it is reputable. But all maganizes can be biased, true. They did quote the Russian generals in stating that indeed Russia is considering such a thing, but of course, it may just be idle talk.

Russia seems a bit worried of losing infulence, and also is paranoid of American intentions. I wouldn't blame them for wondering at why America wants to place an anti-missle system in Poland to defend against Iran...and not, say, in Israel, where it is closer to Iran. I understand Russia and sometimes take its side on its issue, but not by much...

But, here is the main reason I am worried. I just don't want a WWIII. The last two World Wars were bad for the economy, lots of people died, press censors existed...and well, it's overall, terrible things. They were unavoidable, maybe necessary...but it would be best if a third World War does not happen. I guess I'm very worried about things like this threat that could easily cause much mayhem and confusion.

HK-42
02-20-2007, 04:18 PM
Ouch, can you say possible WW3.

machievelli
02-20-2007, 10:18 PM
Six years ago Ihad someone who claimed a friend had quit the US government project because stars Wars was aimed at 'the third world'.

Would it help to tell putin that if he doesn't launch at Europe or the US the system will ignore him?

Tysyacha
02-20-2007, 10:30 PM
Ooh! Ooh! Russia's EEEEVILLLL! *muahahahahahaha*

Seriously, though, Russia attacking Poland doesn't make any sense to me.
As SilentScope said, Poland is in the European Union and if Russia attacked
her, the EU would come out in full force to defend Poland. And, also, why
would Iran threaten Russia with missiles? Russia sells Iran oil and weapons,
as far as I know. I also believe, if I remember correctly, that Russia was
against putting any sanctions on Iran because of its nuclear program.

Iraq? Phfft. Except for Kurdistan, that country's pretty much a wreck now.

North Korea? I don't know why North Korea would attack Russia either.

But, I really think Russia won't touch Poland unless the feces hits the fan.
Putin may be "Polonium Man" or "Stalin 2.0", as Newsweek's CW says, but
if he attacks Poland, all bets are off that the world will cower before Russia.

Europe will blast Putin's butt back to the Stone Age, and that'll be that.

SilentScope001
02-20-2007, 11:00 PM
Seriously, though, Russia attacking Poland doesn't make any sense to me.
As SilentScope said, Poland is in the European Union and if Russia attacked
her, the EU would come out in full force to defend Poland. And, also, why
would Iran threaten Russia with missiles? Russia sells Iran oil and weapons,
as far as I know. I also believe, if I remember correctly, that Russia was
against putting any sanctions on Iran because of its nuclear program.

Here's the thing. Russia worried that that anti-missle defense program based in Poland and Czech Republic are not aimed at Iran or North Korea or any rogue nation, as USA claimed, but aimed at Russia itself. Russia is worried that America wants to take over all the territory that Russia previously had infulence over, and also make Russia weaker in the process, by surronding it and preparing anti-missle defense programs.

Jae Onasi
02-20-2007, 11:02 PM
Like Russia doesn't already have nukes pointed at any country outside its borders? :)

Phision
02-21-2007, 03:06 AM
russia would never fire a nuclear bomb against poland or the czech republic for 3 reasons:

1. it would upset the balance of power in the world russia is not a super power anymore it may be huge but its political power in the world is less than the UKs.

2. no democratic country (which russia is, even though many would disagree with this view as putin seems to almost have drawn himself a small cult of personality but we'll leave that to another day) has ever declared war against another democratic country.

3. and apart from anything they use russia gas and oil it would be a bad idea for russia who is still, although coming to an end of an industrial revolution. it would be foolish of russia to declare war on what can only be called a source of revenue.

mur'phon
02-21-2007, 04:13 AM
it would upset the balance of power in the world russia is not a super power anymore
Define superpower. They might not be equal to the U.S and China, but nr 3 means that they still are a force to be recogned with. Besides their relationship with China gives them a strong ally

it may be huge but its political power in the world is less than the UKs.
In the west, their political power is less than the UKs, but in most other places it got far more. Iran, most of Africa, and China are examples of importance where they got a lot more power than the UK.

no democratic country (which russia is, even though many would disagree with this view as putin seems to almost have drawn himself a small cult of personality but we'll leave that to another day) has ever declared war against another democratic country

Rusia is democratic country? Since when.

3. and apart from anything they use russia gas and oil it would be a bad idea for russia who is still, although coming to an end of an industrial revolution. it would be foolish of russia to declare war on what can only be called a source of revenue.
Oil and gas they can sell to a bunch of other countries, and with Putins quest for power, they could easily sacrifice a small market.

I agre that Russia is higly unlikely to fire a nuclear bomb, I just dissagre with the reasons.

lukeiamyourdad
02-21-2007, 07:10 PM
Define superpower. They might not be equal to the U.S and China, but nr 3 means that they still are a force to be recogned with. Besides their relationship with China gives them a strong ally


In the west, their political power is less than the UKs, but in most other places it got far more. Iran, most of Africa, and China are examples of importance where they got a lot more power than the UK.

Realist are we? I'll argue that they don't have the economy to support any sort of military campaign against the powers of the EU. The public might not support it either, as after over a decade of misery following the fall of the USSR, they finally are getting better living standards. Political and economical suicide.



Rusia is democratic country? Since when.

It's actually highly debatable. The definition of what is a democracy is coming under great criticism from the Eastern nations. Basically, the current "model" of democracy is the one created by Westerners. The question raised is that can that definition be applied to another culture?

Also, the saying that no democracy attacks another democracy (democratic peace) is also subject for debate, for the reason above. It stems from political philosophy and is considered an unscientific saying. In fact, it could be irrelevant the next morning.


Oil and gas they can sell to a bunch of other countries, and with Putins quest for power, they could easily sacrifice a small market.

I agre that Russia is higly unlikely to fire a nuclear bomb, I just dissagre with the reasons.

Like my point above, they can sell to other countries, they have been for years. Making the region unstable is simply economical suicide. There's always the risk of a blockade and the regions producing these resources being targeted first.

Ctrl Alt Del
02-21-2007, 07:27 PM
But, here is the main reason I am worried. I just don't want a WWIII. The last two World Wars were bad for the economy, lots of people died, press censors existed...and well, it's overall, terrible things. They were unavoidable, maybe necessary...but it would be best if a third World War does not happen. I guess I'm very worried about things like this threat that could easily cause much mayhem and confusion.


Even WWII was avoidable. Some people that study Sun Tzu (back on that time) said it was possible. It just happened cause of an unusual set of happenings, anyway.

SilentScope001
04-26-2007, 04:49 PM
Escalation of possible World War III over Missle Base:

American View:

http://news.monstersandcritics.com/europe/news/article_1297016.php/NATO_cautions_Putin_over_call_for_CFE_treaty_freez e__2nd_Roundup_

Russian view:

http://www.upi.com/Security_Terrorism/Briefing/2007/04/26/putin_suspends_cfe_may_leave_treaty/

No nuking of Poland, but Russia is pulling out of the CFE treaty. Then again, NATO never really ratified it...

CFE stands for Conventional Forces in Europe Treaty. Basically, it is a treaty that prevents US and Russia from stationing troops in Europe. It helped to govern relations in the post-Cold-War era...until now.

Totenkopf
04-27-2007, 03:27 AM
Personally, I don't believe they'd do it till a war had actually started. Then it's anyone's guess what kind of turns that would take. But it's one thing to threaten (no doubt to express the DEGREE of anger/disapproval they feel) and another to follow through. But given Europe's overall reticense in confronting the perceived threat of Isalm, I can certainly see a situation where the Russians could miscalculate and assume that the Euro's would cave if they thought the threat was real. But frankly, they'd be more effective in peacetime wielding energy supplies as a weapon of influence than suggesting a nuke strike. The French and English might actually have to fire theirs off in retaliation (not to mention the US, as it would be part of American military power being hit).

Lord Spitfire
04-27-2007, 08:52 AM
World tentions are really escalating. . .

But I don't think they would just bomb Poland. If they would, then why didn't they just bomb a bunch of contries like mad, why didn't they just declare war on the US, or why didn't they just start a campaign of world domination, hell; I wouldn't be surprised if they create a portal to bring Darth Revan here, make an alliance with him and his army, and blast every other country from the face of the Earth?

Okay, maybe that was streching things a little . . . ( :) ) but a nuclear bombing for simply buying a defence system, to a country which is one of many, some of them even weaker? This is crazy! Why would they do something like that with no warning? It's suicide, especially since all of Europe will declare war on them!

That aside, as I said, world tensions are escallating like mad. There are priminent signs of WWIII. I think that the world leaders need to listen to those signs, and stop bombing and threatening everyone! I mean, we have terrorism groups, countries bombing other countries because they're not a democracy, and now an uncalled for NUCLEAR THREAT?!

In a way, if you think about it, it already is a world war . . . a cold world war, no? Every country is involved in this, especially western countries and the middle east, though less so in the southeast, but really . . . in a few years, WWIII would be declared!

SilentScope001
04-27-2007, 01:02 PM
I mean, we have terrorism groups, countries bombing other countries because they're not a democracy, and now an uncalled for NUCLEAR THREAT?!

Well, to be fair, the military general did say he was going to bomb Poland to stop it. I used the term "nuke", even though in essence, the military general really didn't call for a nuking of Poland, but just a bombing of Poland (which I assume would mean nuking it...but now that I look at it at hindsight, likely no).

Even so, judging from higher tensions, it's suprising it's not on CNN.

mimartin
04-27-2007, 02:57 PM
Personally I believe a missile defense built by the Americanís will be about as effective as a screen door on a submarine. Everything Iíve seen shows it as ineffective unless tested at the most optimal of conditions. I see it as a huge black hole sucking in money that will never be seen again.

Even under ideal conditions I donít see it stopping more than one missile at a time with its current technology. Therefore I donít see how it is a threat to Russia at this time.

I also donít see it as a treat to terrorist either. I find it more likely that when the next nuclear attack happens it will come from either a dirty bomb or nuclear warhead smuggled into a populated area. Even a rogue nation would not want to face the reprisals of total destruction. So giving nuclear material to terrorist groups and allowing them to do the dirty work makes more sense. The nation can then deny involvement or just say the material was stolen. Without absolute proof do you think youíd ever get the United Nation to agree on a punishment?

I believe Russia is just rattling its sabers in order to get consecutions from the US and Europe in other areas.

Quanon
04-27-2007, 02:59 PM
Weird , there where no big news items about this ... I live in the EU so I thought this would be a big topic if it was a "real" big threath .

Anyway , the russians seem to talk big all the time , last big words where said about the statue they where moving to another place out of one estlands citys .

Russian claimed that would change their relationship "big" time .

For its just chatter to the wall , lots of talk and all .
Guess you shouldn't worry that much , since every country in the world has nuke pointed up in the air . We could all blast each other ... doesn't matter ;)

SilentScope001
04-27-2007, 04:53 PM
Even under ideal conditions I donít see it stopping more than one missile at a time with its current technology. Therefore I donít see how it is a threat to Russia at this time.

Hm, it could just be a symbolic loss of Russia, and there is fear that the system could work.

Another thing that Russia is afraid of is that this system could easily be converted from defending a nuclear attack to launching a nuclear attack. If someone who dislike you plant what could be a potential nuclear silo right next door, you might get a bit worried...

Totenkopf
04-28-2007, 02:50 PM
The fear of it being about to work is most likely the problem. If such a system could intercept Russian missles before they reach space and deploy their MIRVed warheads and decoys, that would put them at a severe disadvantage in any potential conflict, almost effectively removing the potential Russian trump card of meaningful retaliation.

SilentScope001
07-08-2008, 07:57 PM
US, Czech Republic sign defense agreement (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080708/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/rice_missile_defense)

Just talking about the new Czech Republic-US deal that was signed that paves the way for the Missle Defense System to be installed over there (it has to be ratified first though), the new protests that are being waged in the capital against the deal (the article claims only 30% of the Czech Republic supports the deal), the Presidental candinates' views towards the deal (McCain: Yes, Obama: Maybe), and new attempts by America in order to get a Polish deal down. Of course, being me, I only focused on this part of the article:

Shortly after the treaty was signed, Russia's Foreign Ministry said Moscow would be forced to initiate a military response if the deal goes ahead.

If the agreement is ratified, "we will be forced to react not with diplomatic, but with military-technical methods," the Foreign Ministry statement said. It did not give specifics of what the response would entail. In February, then-President Vladimir Putin said that if the plan advances, Russia could aim missiles toward prospective missile defense sites and deploy missiles in the Baltic Sea region, which borders Poland.

jonathan7
07-08-2008, 08:22 PM
<snip>

TO be honest SS001, I see this all as posturing and nothing more; I think there will eventually be a WW3, but I don't think it will be started by the U.S and Russia; I think it will be Middle East in origin.

Arcesious
07-08-2008, 10:30 PM
One thing all politicians need to learn: Bluffs and compromises only work for so long.

Rev7
07-08-2008, 11:51 PM
One thing that I have to say is, if they (Russia) has nuclear weapons, who says that they can't use them? A threat is a threat. Russia and America are not friends, as I am sure all of you already know. They would probably just be an excuse to attack. I think that we should take it seriously, though. All that we can really do is make assumptions. I certainly hope that it doesn't happen. :/ This potential attack could be nuclear or conventional. I hope that neither happen...

Nedak
07-09-2008, 12:11 AM
article link doesn't work

Rev7
07-09-2008, 12:12 AM
The "time news" one, that is :)

Nedak
07-09-2008, 12:16 AM
^ Yes, that's what I meant.

Arcesious
07-09-2008, 12:17 AM
Indeed. It would be nice if leaders of countries started being reasonable for once. However, I do not think that the defense system is needed too much. Enough with all the walls, secrets, and century-old grudges- let's start working together on these things for once, and be more open-minded. We'll still need walls against idiots, but nothing will work unless if we have walls of united countries, instead of seperated ones. The problem is that we spend too much time speculating and bickering. WWII proved that immediate action works. We've disucssed all these things quite a bit. We should know by now what works and doesn't work. And now that we do, let's start seeing some more coordinated immediate action.

Rev7
07-09-2008, 12:21 AM
I really do wish that there was (is, I guess) peace. World peace. That meaning no more wars, threats, ect. What a world that would be.... :/

Nedak
07-09-2008, 12:21 AM
World peace would be impossible.

We just aren't designed that way.

jonathan7
07-09-2008, 12:24 AM
World peace would be impossible.

We just aren't designed that way.

People like you disgust me, world peace is possible, just as soon as I've killed you ;)

The Mugabe way.... 'We shall have peace'.

Rev7
07-09-2008, 12:26 AM
World peace would be impossible.

We just aren't designed that way.
I wish that I could prove you wrong. :/
People like you disgust me, world peace is possible, just as soon as I've killed you ;)

The Mugabe way.... 'We shall have peace'.
:lol:

Arcesious
07-09-2008, 12:27 AM
World peace would be impossible.

We just aren't designed that way.

Heh, world peace may never be, but a stable, free, peaceful system of sorts for a considerable portion of mankind is possible.

JediAthos
07-09-2008, 01:30 AM
I would wager that the military, the state department, CIA, NSA, and whatever alphabet soup agency you can name have examined possible outcomes to this process before they went ahead with it. I would also wager that they are fully aware of Russia's capabilities, and most likely where their missiles are and what the likelihood(sp) is that they would use them.

Since the cold war ended Russia's economy has been in the toilet, and their military is a mere shadow of what it once was. I'm not saying that they shouldn't be listened to, but I am saying is that their possible actions were considered way before the Czechs were even approached.

Achilles
07-09-2008, 01:41 AM
We will have world peace

...the moment we discover an alien civilization with abundant natural resources and comparable-or-lesser technology.

tk102
07-09-2008, 01:45 AM
We will have peace when we are Borg.

Achilles
07-09-2008, 01:48 AM
I hope that we pick a better name than that :(

Also, I vote that Rev7 gets to be Locutus.

Totenkopf
07-09-2008, 02:52 AM
At the rate we seem to be going, I'd wager on world piece(s). :xp:

Rev7
07-09-2008, 02:34 PM
I hope that we pick a better name than that :(

Also, I vote that Rev7 gets to be Locutus.
Might I ask why? :/