|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Bye-bye INF treaty?
"Allen Thomson" wrote:
"What Russia Has to Be Afraid Of "It is highly likely that the missile threat from "problem" states is not the genuine reason for the creation of the missile defense system by the Americans. The real motivation of the multibillion-dollar undertaking is the desire to expand U.S. military and strategic capacities and constrict those of other states that have nuclear missiles, Which should surprise no one - as America tends to work in such a fashion as to support and further it's own national goals. What bothers me is that so many deluded people accept _other nations_ doing so (supporting and furthering) - but boggle at the concept of the US doing so. D. -- Touch-twice life. Eat. Drink. Laugh. -Resolved: To be more temperate in my postings. Oct 5th, 2004 JDL |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Bye-bye INF treaty?
|
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Bye-bye INF treaty?
Pat Flannery wrote:
:Remember how I said pulling out of the ABM treaty was a dumb move, :because the Russians would think that any treaty we had with them wasn't :worth the paper it was written on? :Well, guess what?: :http://www.spacewar.com/reports/Russ...reaty_999.html So, if the Russians have no plans to shoot at Europe, what is the problem? So, if the Russians have no plans to shoot at Europe, what do they want to get back into the IRBM business for? So, who do you think the Europeans will blame for the Russians building a nuclear arsenal aimed straight at them? -- "Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar territory." --G. Behn |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Bye-bye INF treaty?
You really aren't quite sane, are you?
Pat Flannery wrote: : : :Rand Simberg wrote: : So? Do you really fantasize that they wouldn't do this if we hadn't : withdrawn from ABM? And do you really imagine that the Soviets were, : or Russians are, punctilious about treaties in general? : : :http://www.spacewar.com/reports/Why_...nse_999.htm l :The Russians are having a hard time figuring out why ABMs are to be put :in Poland to defend the U.S. against missile attack from Iran or North :Korea, in much the same way we would think it odd if Russia started :deploying ABMs in Mexico or Canada to defend Moscow from Chinese missile :attack. :What makes it so pointless is that 10 ABMs in Poland are worthless :against a North Korean attack and so would only be of any possible use :against a Iranian attack that overflew Europe on the way to the U.S.. :Iran would realize an attack by that few missiles would be suicidal, so :that doesn't make sense either, so what's the point of all this? :Simple; the point of all this is to act like real assholes and see if we :can **** off the Russians, and rub their little red noses in it. :With luck they'll start a new cold war, and then we can spend uncounted :more hundreds of billions defending ourselves against them. :In the spirit of the treaty, the Russians are abiding by the means to :withdraw from it: :http://www.fas.org/nuke/control/inf/text/inf.htm :"Article XV : :1. This Treaty shall be of unlimited duration. : :2. Each Party shall, in exercising its national sovereignty, have the :right to withdraw from this Treaty if it decides that extraordinary :events related to the subject matter of this Treaty have jeopardized its :supreme interests. It shall give notice of its decision to withdraw to :the other Party six months prior to withdrawal from this Treaty. Such :notice shall include a statement of the extraordinary events the :notifying Party regards as having jeopardized its supreme interests." :Having a foreign country deploying missiles on your border would robably be considered an extraordinary event that jeopardized your :supreme interests, as the Cuban Missile Crisis showed. :So they are now going to have some fun at our expense, I imagine. :Our ABMs are designed to intercept ballistic missiles, so I imagine :they'll get working on hypersonic cruise missiles now. :If they can fake us out by pretending to have some super technology that :we must counter, they can bankrupt us the way we did them with Star :Wars, which would be quite ironic really. : :Pat : |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Bye-bye INF treaty?
On Feb 16, 12:15 pm, (Rand Simberg)
wrote: On Fri, 16 Feb 2007 17:04:18 GMT, in a place far, far away, (Derek Lyons) made the phosphor on my monitor glow in such a way as to indicate that: "Allen Thomson" wrote: "What Russia Has to Be Afraid Of "It is highly likely that the missile threat from "problem" states is not the genuine reason for the creation of the missile defense system by the Americans. The real motivation of the multibillion-dollar undertaking is the desire to expand U.S. military and strategic capacities and constrict those of other states that have nuclear missiles, Which should surprise no one - as America tends to work in such a fashion as to support and further it's own national goals. What bothers me is that so many deluded people accept _other nations_ doing so (supporting and furthering) - but boggle at the concept of the US doing so. That's because Amerikkka is obviously evil and imperialistic, and the worse country in the history of the world, other than Israel. Rand, have you been hanging out at the UN again? I don't know what is worse, those that are brainwashed into thinking that the US and Israel are the worst countries in the world or those that are brainwashed into thinking that they are best countries in the world. Eric |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Bye-bye INF treaty?
On Feb 16, 1:52 pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
You really aren't quite sane, are you? Clearly Pat is on to something when you use the 'insane' approach. Freddy, this isn't a totalitarian country, at least not yet; you don't have to kiss the ass of the govt. at every turn. Pat Flannery wrote: : ::Rand Simberg wrote: : So? Do you really fantasize that they wouldn't do this if we hadn't : withdrawn from ABM? And do you really imagine that the Soviets were, : or Russians are, punctilious about treaties in general? : : :http://www.spacewar.com/reports/Why_...tic_Missile_De... :The Russians are having a hard time figuring out why ABMs are to be put :in Poland to defend the U.S. against missile attack from Iran or North :Korea, in much the same way we would think it odd if Russia started :deploying ABMs in Mexico or Canada to defend Moscow from Chinese missile :attack. :What makes it so pointless is that 10 ABMs in Poland are worthless :against a North Korean attack and so would only be of any possible use :against a Iranian attack that overflew Europe on the way to the U.S.. :Iran would realize an attack by that few missiles would be suicidal, so :that doesn't make sense either, so what's the point of all this? :Simple; the point of all this is to act like real assholes and see if we :can **** off the Russians, and rub their little red noses in it. :With luck they'll start a new cold war, and then we can spend uncounted :more hundreds of billions defending ourselves against them. :In the spirit of the treaty, the Russians are abiding by the means to :withdraw from it: :http://www.fas.org/nuke/control/inf/text/inf.htm :"Article XV : :1. This Treaty shall be of unlimited duration. : :2. Each Party shall, in exercising its national sovereignty, have the :right to withdraw from this Treaty if it decides that extraordinary :events related to the subject matter of this Treaty have jeopardized its :supreme interests. It shall give notice of its decision to withdraw to :the other Party six months prior to withdrawal from this Treaty. Such :notice shall include a statement of the extraordinary events the :notifying Party regards as having jeopardized its supreme interests." :Having a foreign country deploying missiles on your border would robably be considered an extraordinary event that jeopardized your :supreme interests, as the Cuban Missile Crisis showed. :So they are now going to have some fun at our expense, I imagine. :Our ABMs are designed to intercept ballistic missiles, so I imagine :they'll get working on hypersonic cruise missiles now. :If they can fake us out by pretending to have some super technology that :we must counter, they can bankrupt us the way we did them with Star :Wars, which would be quite ironic really. : :Pat : |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Bye-bye INF treaty?
On Feb 16, 1:50 pm, Fred J. McCall wrote:
Pat Flannery wrote: :Remember how I said pulling out of the ABM treaty was a dumb move, :because the Russians would think that any treaty we had with them wasn't :worth the paper it was written on? :Well, guess what?: :http://www.spacewar.com/reports/Russ..._Quit_INF_Trea... So, if the Russians have no plans to shoot at Europe, what is the problem? So that is why we allowed nukes in Cuba? Oops, we didn't allow them and we don't have plans to shoot at Cuba either. Counterintel just isn't your bag is it Freddy? So, if the Russians have no plans to shoot at Europe, what do they want to get back into the IRBM business for? So, who do you think the Europeans will blame for the Russians building a nuclear arsenal aimed straight at them? I guess it all depends where we plan on putting ours. -- "Some people get lost in thought because it's such unfamiliar territory." --G. Behn |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Bye-bye INF treaty?
"Eric Chomko" wrote:
:On Feb 16, 1:52 pm, Fred J. McCall wrote: : You really aren't quite sane, are you? : :Clearly Pat is on to something when you use the 'insane' approach. : :Freddy, this isn't a totalitarian country, at least not yet; you don't :have to kiss the ass of the govt. at every turn. Usual stupid El Chimpko non sequitur. : : Pat Flannery wrote: : : : : ::Rand Simberg wrote: : : : So? Do you really fantasize that they wouldn't do this if we hadn't : : withdrawn from ABM? And do you really imagine that the Soviets were, : : or Russians are, punctilious about treaties in general? : : : : : :http://www.spacewar.com/reports/Why_...tic_Missile_De... : :The Russians are having a hard time figuring out why ABMs are to be put : :in Poland to defend the U.S. against missile attack from Iran or North : :Korea, in much the same way we would think it odd if Russia started : :deploying ABMs in Mexico or Canada to defend Moscow from Chinese missile : :attack. : :What makes it so pointless is that 10 ABMs in Poland are worthless : :against a North Korean attack and so would only be of any possible use : :against a Iranian attack that overflew Europe on the way to the U.S.. : :Iran would realize an attack by that few missiles would be suicidal, so : :that doesn't make sense either, so what's the point of all this? : :Simple; the point of all this is to act like real assholes and see if we : :can **** off the Russians, and rub their little red noses in it. : :With luck they'll start a new cold war, and then we can spend uncounted : :more hundreds of billions defending ourselves against them. : :In the spirit of the treaty, the Russians are abiding by the means to : :withdraw from it: : :http://www.fas.org/nuke/control/inf/text/inf.htm : :"Article XV : : : :1. This Treaty shall be of unlimited duration. : : : :2. Each Party shall, in exercising its national sovereignty, have the : :right to withdraw from this Treaty if it decides that extraordinary : :events related to the subject matter of this Treaty have jeopardized its : :supreme interests. It shall give notice of its decision to withdraw to : :the other Party six months prior to withdrawal from this Treaty. Such : :notice shall include a statement of the extraordinary events the : :notifying Party regards as having jeopardized its supreme interests." : :Having a foreign country deploying missiles on your border would : robably be considered an extraordinary event that jeopardized your : :supreme interests, as the Cuban Missile Crisis showed. : :So they are now going to have some fun at our expense, I imagine. : :Our ABMs are designed to intercept ballistic missiles, so I imagine : :they'll get working on hypersonic cruise missiles now. : :If they can fake us out by pretending to have some super technology that : :we must counter, they can bankrupt us the way we did them with Star : :Wars, which would be quite ironic really. : : : :Pat : : : |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Bye-bye INF treaty?
"Eric Chomko" wrote:
:On Feb 16, 1:50 pm, Fred J. McCall wrote: : Pat Flannery wrote: : : :Remember how I said pulling out of the ABM treaty was a dumb move, : :because the Russians would think that any treaty we had with them wasn't : :worth the paper it was written on? : :Well, guess what?: : :http://www.spacewar.com/reports/Russ..._Quit_INF_Trea... : : So, if the Russians have no plans to shoot at Europe, what is the : problem? : :So that is why we allowed nukes in Cuba? Oops, we didn't allow them :and we don't have plans to shoot at Cuba either. Counterintel just :isn't your bag is it Freddy? Sense just isn't your bag is it El Chimpko? What, pray tell, does your preceding spew have to do with ANYTHING? : So, if the Russians have no plans to shoot at Europe, what do they : want to get back into the IRBM business for? : : So, who do you think the Europeans will blame for the Russians : building a nuclear arsenal aimed straight at them? : :I guess it all depends where we plan on putting ours. We're talking about US deployment of AN ANTI-MISSILE SYSTEM IN POLAND AND CZECHOSLOVAKIA, you stupid *******. *WE* are not talking about "putting ours" anywhere at all. -- "Ignorance is preferable to error, and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing than he who believes what is wrong." -- Thomas Jefferson |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Bye-bye INF treaty?
In article ,
Pat Flannery wrote: What makes it so pointless is that 10 ABMs in Poland are worthless against a North Korean attack and so would only be of any possible use against a Iranian attack that overflew Europe on the way to the U.S.. Iran would realize an attack by that few missiles would be suicidal, so that doesn't make sense either, so what's the point of all this? We've been through this before, Pat: it makes no sense *if* you assume that the leadership in Iran (and its neighbors) will always be rational enough and secure enough that deterrence will work. Unfortunately, it's easy to think of reasons why that might not be the case. Notably, in countries where the consequences of political failure often include sudden death, a leader who's backed himself into a corner may personally have nothing to lose by playing nuclear Chicken with the US. As one P. Flannery was heard to say a couple of months back: You'll say: "But yes! But a nuclear war could wipe out all of our nation." Oddly enough, anyone it wipes out _after_ me isn't of much concern to me in any concrete form. :-D -- spsystems.net is temporarily off the air; | Henry Spencer mail to henry at zoo.utoronto.ca instead. | |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Bye-bye INF treaty? | Pat Flannery | Policy | 418 | March 20th 07 04:12 AM |
Limited ASAT test ban treaty | Totorkon | Policy | 3 | March 9th 07 03:19 AM |
Outer Space Treaty | John Schilling | Policy | 24 | May 24th 06 03:14 PM |
Bush to Withdraw from Outer Space Treaty, Annex the Moon | Mark R. Whittington | Policy | 7 | April 2nd 05 08:02 PM |