U.S. anti-missile station in Czech Republic / Poland

http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSL1927845620070219

 

What, Russian missiles are capable of hitting targets in Europe? Wow, BIG surprise! I mean ... really, who'd have tought it, huh?

 

Gee, is this character actually threatening NATO with an attack? Washington may be run by dickheads, but Moscow sure isn't lagging too far behind in this respect.

 

He's just an old horse trying to get in his last hoorah before going to pasture.

Sending an ABM to Poland or Czech doesn't really effect any balance of anything. This is akin to someone bitching about the Nike/Hercules systems in Germany during the 70s. In the grand scheme of things, the military usefullness is nil considering the short flight times.

They are pissed because they have been left out of the joint development of the ABM systems, so their mouthing off was to be expected. Ultimately however, this whole affair of placing an ABM is symbolism for the host country, and nothing more.

 

Nike-Hercules bitching?! That SAMs unable of shooting a MiG-25?! Maybe you mean Pershing-II in the 80s?

Middle-range missiles, if produced again by Russian military-industrial complex, will be issued in such quantities that they'll overload any ABM system, beyond any planning.

Point-defence like Patriot will be able to intercept astonishing 10% of the incoming targets in case the warheads will fall sown w/o any ECM.

I understand "symbolism for the gost country", making it a legitimate target for Strategic Missile Corps, I don't understand "joint development of ABM systems".

Soviet Union/Russian Federation posesses a working ABM shield protecting Moscow since mid-70s. It's capable of intercepting about a dozen of warheads coming down, an accidental launch. According to 1972 ABM treaty - both sides were limited to one region to be protected by an ABM system. Americans decided to shield their missile farms in North Dakota. Evil Russians (tm) preferred to protect a 10 million megapolis. Go figure.

Our main ABM shield is a "Missile Attack Warning System", with land and space-based units, detecting any launch all over the globe. Any launch is reported immediately, so, guess what happens then?

 

Arguing over who has the better static fortifications. Is a smokescreen guys.
Static fortifications are a joke.
There won't be an umbrella to protect against nuclear rain and any talk of one is NOT wishful thinking, but diversion, like a shell game or a bait and switch.

Protective shields:
Read about Agincourt. See what happened to those French guys with their steel armor, their girded mounts. No amount of steel would protect those guys. France's ruling class was Kaput in a day.
A day.

A nuclear balance is good. A nuclear attack is death. Period. No winners. Wish and whine, pray, talk talk. Think. Think. Dream.

Want the Russians to launch THE END OF THE WORLD? [I know, the answer is no]...
Try doing to them what was done 60+ years ago.
Russia and it's dominions suffered horribly, no matter how much an asshole Stalin may or may not have been, those people who lived there didn't deserve the meat grinder. And never again.

Can't blame Russia for wielding weapons.

[I so appreciate not looking north with great fear. I did for so many years, as did many millions of people who live in my country. The nuclear shield for the USA is and was CANADA'S space]

Blah blah blah

 

not <S> from me

 

There was a fair ammount of complaining when the Nike-Ajax/Hercules system was brought to West Germany. The Mig-25 wasn't around during this time frame; Su-22, Mig-21, etc.
Pointing out this small part of complaint history, over a system being brought to (x) location is a way of pointing out that this whole affair is a status quo situation. Country (x) complains of this or that about country (y), and in the end, everyone goes home to worry about more important matters, such as what's for dinner.


Actually neither side is Evil(tm), both sides simply enjoying a little bitch fest ever so often, to keep people's interests. There always has to be a Caus Beli for any side to justify (x) expense or decision, and painting something as being Evil(tm) is the best way to do it.

 

Yawn.....

Ok guys, let's get the old video tapes out and play "Dr. Strangelove..or How I stopped worrying and learned how to love the bomb..."

...and then maybe "Failsafe"... not sure if I would see them in that order.

..and to really make everyone think/sick/worried: Telefon


Also let's read these words again:


Farewell Radio and Television Address to the American People by President Dwight D. Eisenhower, January 17, 1961.

My fellow Americans:
Three days from now, after half a century in the service of our country, I shall lay down the responsibilities of office as, in traditional and solemn ceremony, the authority of the Presidency is vested in my successor.
This evening I come to you with a message of leave-taking and farewell, and to share a few final thoughts with you, my countrymen.
Like every other citizen, I wish the new President, and all who will labor with him, Godspeed. I pray that the coming years will be blessed with peace and prosperity for all.
Our people expect their President and the Congress to find essential agreement on issues of great moment, the wise resolution of which will better shape the future of the Nation.
My own relations with the Congress, which began on a remote and tenuous basis when, long ago, a member of the Senate appointed me to West Point, have since ranged to the intimate during the war and immediate post-war period, and, finally, to the mutually interdependent during these past eight years.
In this final relationship, the Congress and the Administration have, on most vital issues, cooperated well, to serve the national good rather than mere partisanship, and so have assured that the business of the Nation should go forward. So, my official relationship with the Congress ends in a feeling, on my part, of gratitude that we have been able to do so much together.
II
We now stand ten years past the midpoint of a century that has witnessed four major wars among great nations. Three of these involved our own country. Despite these holocausts America is today the strongest, the most influential and most productive nation in the world. Understandably proud of this pre-eminence, we yet realize that America's leadership and prestige depend, not merely upon our unmatched material progress, riches and military strength, but on how we use our power in the interests of world peace and human betterment.
III
Throughout America's adventure in free government, our basic purposes have been to keep the peace; to foster progress in human achievement, and to enhance liberty, dignity and integrity among people and among nations. To strive for less would be unworthy of a free and religious people. Any failure traceable to arrogance, or our lack of comprehension or readiness to sacrifice would inflict upon us grievous hurt both at home and abroad.
Progress toward these noble goals is persistently threatened by the conflict now engulfing the world. It commands our whole attention, absorbs our very beings. We face a hostile ideology-global in scope, atheistic in character, ruthless in purpose, and insidious in method. Unhappily the danger it poses promises to be of indefinite duration. To meet it successfully, there is called for, not so much the emotional and transitory sacrifices of crisis, but rather those which enable us to carry forward steadily, surely, and without complaint the burdens of a prolonged and complex struggle-with liberty at stake. Only thus shall we remain, despite every provocation, on our charted course toward permanent peace and human betterment.
Crises there will continue to be. In meeting them, whether foreign or domestic, great or small,there is a recurring temptation to feel that some spectacular and costly action could become the miraculous solution to all current difficulties. A huge increase in newer elements of our defense; development of unrealistic programs to cure every ill in agriculture; a dramatic expansion in basic and applied research-these and many other possibilities, each possibly promising in itself, may be suggested as the only way to the road we which to travel.
But each proposal must be weighed in the light of a broader consideration: the need to maintain balance in and among national programs-balance between the private and the public economy, balance between cost and hoped for advantage-balance between the clearly necessary and the comfortably desirable; balance between our essential requirements as a nation and the duties imposed by the nation upon the individual; balance between action of the moment and the national welfare of the future. Good judgment seeks balance and progress; lack of it eventually finds imbalance and frustration.
The record of many decades stands as proof that our people and their government have, in the main, understood these truths and have responded to them well, in the face of stress and threat. But threats, new in kind or degree, constantly arise. I mention two only.
IV
A vital element in keeping the peace is our military establishment. Our arms must be mighty, ready for instant action, so that no potential aggressor may be tempted to risk his own destruction.
Our military organization today bears little relation to that known by any of my predecessors in peace time, or indeed by the fighting men of World War II or Korea.
Until the latest of our world conflicts, the United States had no armaments industry. American makers of plowshares could, with time and as required, make swords as well. But now we can no longer risk emergency improvisation of national defense; we have been compelled to create a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions. Added to this, three and a half million men and women are directly engaged in the defense establishment. We annually spend on military security more than the net income of all United States corporations.
This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence-economic, political, even spiritual-is felt in every city, every state house, every office of the Federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society.
In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.
We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together.
Akin to, and largely responsible for the sweeping changes in our industrial-military posture, has been the technological revolution during recent decades.
In this revolution, research has become central; it also becomes more formalized, complex, and costly. A steadily increasing share is conducted for, by, or at the direction of, the Federal government.
Today, the solitary inventor, tinkering in his shop, has been over shadowed by task forces of scientists in laboratories and testing fields. In the same fashion, the free university, historically the fountainhead of free ideas and scientific discovery, has experienced a revolution in the conduct of research. Partly because of the huge costs involved, a government contract becomes virtually a substitute for intellectual curiosity. For every old blackboard there are now hundreds of new electronic computers.
The prospect of domination of the nation's scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present and is gravely to be regarded.
Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.
It is the task of statesmanship to mold, to balance, and to integrate these and other forces, new and old, within the principles of our democratic system-ever aiming toward the supreme goals of our free society.
V
Another factor in maintaining balance involves the element of time. As we peer into society's future, we-you and I, and our government-must avoid the impulse to live only for today, plundering, for our own ease and convenience, the precious resources of tomorrow. We cannot mortgage the material assets of our grandchildren without risking the loss also of their political and spiritual heritage. We want democracy to survive for all generations to come, not to become the insolvent phantom of tomorrow.
VI
Down the long lane of the history yet to be written America knows that this world of ours, ever growing smaller, must avoid becoming a community of dreadful fear and hate, and be, instead, a proud confederation of mutual trust and respect.
Such a confederation must be one of equals. The weakest must come to the conference table with the same confidence as do we, protected as we are by our moral, economic, and military strength. That table, though scarred by many past frustrations, cannot be abandoned for the certain agony of the battlefield.
Disarmament, with mutual honor and confidence, is a continuing imperative. Together we must learn how to compose difference, not with arms, but with intellect and decent purpose. Because this need is so sharp and apparent I confess that I lay down my official responsibilities in this field with a definite sense of disappointment. As one who has witnessed the horror and the lingering sadness of war-as one who knows that another war could utterly destroy this civilization which has been so slowly and painfully built over thousands of years-I wish I could say tonight that a lasting peace is in sight.
Happily, I can say that war has been avoided. Steady progress toward our ultimate goal has been made. But, so much remains to be done. As a private citizen, I shall never cease to do what little I can to help the world advance along that road.
VII
So-in this my last good night to you as your President-I thank you for the many opportunities you have given me for public service in war and peace. I trust that in that service you find somethings worthy; as for the rest of it, I know you will find ways to improve performance in the future.
You and I-my fellow citizens-need to be strong in our faith that all nations, under God, will reach the goal of peace with justice. May we be ever unswerving in devotion to principle, confident but humble with power, diligent in pursuit of the Nation's great goals.
To all the peoples of the world, I once more give expression to America's prayerful and continuing inspiration:
We pray that peoples of all faiths, all races, all nations, may have their great human needs satisfied; that those now denied opportunity shall come to enjoy it to the full; that all who yearn for freedom may experience its spiritual blessings; that those who have freedom will understand, also, its heavy responsibilities; that all who are insensitive to the needs of others will learn charity; that the scourges of poverty, disease and ignorance will be made to disappear from the earth, and that, in the goodness of time, all peoples will come to live together in a peace guaranteed by the binding force of mutual respect and love.


Now let me remember the words of a certain US general in a NATO meeting a long time ago:

It was either ' "too bad" or "the problem with" Europe is that all these places(or cities) are less than a megaton apart.'


I think instead of spending billions in missles that will never be used except in demos to sell more missles the countries in Europe should spend the energy in making mag-lev bullet trains to transport cargo and people all over. Also along those tracks ultra high speed fibre optic internet and television connections.
Then I make it free (train and internet) for all high school age children during summer breaks or any vacation to travel to any country in that system.

When the children get to know and play with their fellow Euro neighbors, then maybe all this hate mongering and weapons dealing will fade into oblivion.

Let's not worry about those missles that will very unlikely be used.
I'd worry more about those bombs and devices already in situ in the Embassies of all those countries all over the world....

 

Looseleaf;
I for one would like nothing more than for the world to live in a peace, unfortunately that is non-dooable in many parts.

One day the weapons will be used, and it won't be the US and RU throwing them at each other, most likey they will be throwing them at the ME.
The more nuclear they become, the more likely it is for their more radical elements to gain control; and they will use them without a second thought as to the consequences.

 

It is a very logical assumption on your part, yes.

However looking closer at every "lone nut" and radical "terrorist" action, small war etc. I have noticed that there was/is always a certain special interest group of the geopolitical, military industrialist origins that back-up those extremists.

If it happens as you say, it will only be in the interests of some other... larger more powerfull organization, who I'm afraid the only if not the major interest is financial.

So far everyone knows that any nuke exchange is "bad for business"

 

Ruling class in Japan way way back disallowed possession of flintlock muskets for any but sporting nobility. And in the cases where the odd rich man did get his hands on one, it was not a produced musket, it was a crafted one. A one off. They got to stay happily in their nice, peaceful fuedal society for a couple hundred extra years.....

Then..........

Later, Japan's ruling class changed it's mind after Perry's ships fired their guns in Japan's sacred waters and then eventually, Japan got nuked...

Humans aren't very bright.

Can't put the cork back on the bottle.

 

IIRC while Perry showed his guns - Russians just negotiated But Perry's guns were definetely a matter of persuasion for Russian negotiators. And we got our problems only 50 years later, in 1904-05, while Western world had to wait until late-1930s to understand what's going on. They regretted that they supported Japan in 1904-05.

What the World Police tries to do now is exactly putting the cork back on the bottle. Iran can't have nuclear power?! God damn! their growing metallurgical industry alone needs more power then they can produce without nuclear stations....

What's next? Only nations controlled by the US of A will be allowed to have electricity? Then - what else? Wheel? Fire? "Any use of fire unauthorised by the Supreme Soviet (*) of the known Universe will be punished by a bomb-strike from orbit" ????... Keep picking roots and mushrooms, you, subhumans!

(*) - "soviet" means "council", just in case if you didn't know.

 

Well, let's for a moment put the fighting of our governments aside, and look at the brighter sides of life

Pavel, I think that what we can use now is what I will call Bikiniship, as opposed to the Brinkmanship that our fathers practiced

I hope this will not anger you, but but look at this woman!!!!!!!!!!!! My heart goes crazy seeing her!!!!

Let's imagine for a moment, because it's the weekend, a world where national power is measured by the beauty of our women when posing in bikinis. And don't be mad, because I'm being humorous

O, in such a world, Brazil would be the most powerful, then Russia, then America would be about number 13 or so, lol.

And lest I forget:

 

ok uncles...

i plan on makin a "web-vagina" and a "webcock"

the web-vagina has sensors in it to play sounds and actuate mechanisms to adjust geometry of its shape

the web-cock reads signals to deploy its pneumatic piston

u just buy whichever 1 u need

they hav adjustment for watever picture on screen

and u do wat u need to do

u can even engage in a "webcam" session with another person

guy pushes cock into web-vagina

and the webcock on the other end reads signals and extends the same distance that he is penetratin (adjusted for correct size of course)

im thinkin 'bout homo line for broz & friendz but for now the bigger market belongs in regular config

 

I think you like Broz in a special way Sorry, he like girls.

 

You are writing like a person with a bone to pick.
If you are jealous of the US success, then make your country better; we certainly give it enough money each year.

 

Russia a better country, you kidding?? Russia is perfect as it is, it's where all the civilisation came from!
Don't bother arguing with Boroda - having a discussion with him about politics or history of eastern europe is like trying to discuss religion with islam fundamentalist. "Bent as the sickle, hard as the hammer that crosses it"

 

Actually not arguing, pointing out observations, "writing like someone with a bone to pick", and pointing out facts, "the west subsidizing of the east".
In fact I encourage him to continue with the diatribe, as it is providing good information, and correlation(s) with regards to other questions some members of Fh have been asking.