Pages: 1 2 3  Next -- Posted by goodheart4ever at 7:49 am on Aug. 15, 2008 A top Russian general said Friday that Poland's agreement to accept a US missile defense battery exposes the country to attack, pointing out that Russian military doctrine permits the use of nuclear weapons in such a situation, the Interfax news agency reported. The statement by Gen. Anatoly Nogovitsyn is the strongest threat that Russia has issued against the plans to put missile defense elements in former Soviet satellite nations. Poland and the United States on Thursday signed a deal for Poland to accept a missile defense battery as part of a system the United States says is aimed at blocking attacks by rogue nations but that Moscow claims is aimed at weakening Russia. "Poland, by deploying [the system] is exposing itself to a strike - 100 percent," Nogovitsyn, the deputy chief of staff, was quoted as saying. Interfax said he added, in clear reference to the agreement, that Russia's military doctrine sanctions the use of nuclear weapons "against the allies of countries having nuclear weapons if they in some way help them." Nogovitsyn said that would include elements of strategic deterrence systems, according to Interfax. At a news conference earlier Friday, Nogovitsyn had reiterated Russia's frequently stated warning that placing missile-defense elements in Poland and the Czech Republic would bring an unspecified military response. But his subsequent reported statement substantially stepped up a war of words. Tensions between Russia and the West have soared over the brutal fighting that erupted last week between Russian and Georgian forces over the separatist Georgian region of South Ossetia. Russian forces went deep into Georgia in the fighting, raising wide concerns that Russia could be seeking to occupy parts of its small, pro-US neighbor, which has vigorously lobbied to join NATO, or even to force its government to collapse. Under the agreement that Warsaw and Washington reached Thursday, Poland will accept an American missile interceptor base. "We have crossed the Rubicon," Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk said, referring to US consent to Poland's demands after more than 18 months of negotiations. Washington says the planned system, which is not yet operational, is needed to protect the US and Europe from possible attacks by missile-armed "rogue states" like Iran. The Kremlin, however, feels it is aimed at Russia's missile force and warns it will worsen tensions. In an interview on Poland's news channel TVN24, Tusk said the United States agreed to help augment Poland's defenses with Patriot missiles in exchange for placing 10 missile defense interceptors in the Eastern European country. He said the deal also includes a "mutual commitment" between the two nations to come to each other's assistance "in case of trouble." That clause appeared to be a direct reference to Russia. Poland has all along been guided by fears of a newly resurgent Russia, an anxiety that has intensified with Russia's offensive in Georgia. In past days, Polish leaders said that fighting justified Poland's demands that it get additional security guarantees from Washington in exchange for allowing the anti-missile base on its soil. http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1218710373444&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull -- Posted by churnfulkiler at 7:52 am on Aug. 15, 2008 fuck russia. -- Posted by SLynch89 at 7:52 am on Aug. 15, 2008 Never trust a Russian.... -- Posted by boothy at 7:53 am on Aug. 15, 2008 Good, the US are being far too fucking arrogant. Bloody building missile defence systems in other countries, I'd like to see the US give up their soil - the US cares for nobody but itself, where are your troops? In Georgia? No. Yet Georgia has suffered for many reasons, one because Russia dislikes it's alliance with the US... what fucking alliance? -- Posted by mikeyp123 at 7:55 am on Aug. 15, 2008 Really is possibly the most stupid thing the USA could have continued building considering the current state of things. -- Posted by churnfulkiler at 7:55 am on Aug. 15, 2008 Quote: from boothy at 7:53 am on Aug. 15, 2008 Good, the US are being far too fucking arrogant. Bloody building missile defence systems in other countries, I'd like to see the US give up their soil - the US cares for nobody but itself, where are your troops? In Georgia? No. Yet Georgia has suffered for many reasons, one because Russia dislikes it's alliance with the US... what fucking alliance? its a missle defense system that also protects europe aka ur fucking country u prick -- Posted by SLynch89 at 7:56 am on Aug. 15, 2008 Quote: from boothy at 7:53 am on Aug. 15, 2008 Good, the US are being far too fucking arrogant. Bloody building missile defence systems in other countries, I'd like to see the US give up their soil - the US cares for nobody but itself, where are your troops? In Georgia? No. Yet Georgia has suffered for many reasons, one because Russia dislikes it's alliance with the US... what fucking alliance? Well when those other countries allow us to, that's not much different than building a military base on foreign soil. Also, Georgia is not a member of NATO, and thus we aren't bound by treaty to come to their aid, yet Poland is. So the answer to your question is NATO, didn't you learn this stuff in school? -- Posted by jamesish at 7:57 am on Aug. 15, 2008 It really doesn't surprise me. Prepare for more US stupid things done. -- Posted by SLynch89 at 7:59 am on Aug. 15, 2008 Quote: from jamesish at 7:57 am on Aug. 15, 2008 It really doesn't surprise me. Prepare for more US stupid things done. How on earth is it a stupid move to place interceptor missiles in an allied nation when Russia has repeatedly shown in the last year that they are as militaristic and war hungry as in the days of the soviet union? Tell me how the hell is that a stupid move? -- Posted by mikeyp123 at 8:00 am on Aug. 15, 2008 Quote: from churnfulkiler at 3:55 pm on Aug. 15, 2008 Quote: from boothy at 7:53 am on Aug. 15, 2008 Good, the US are being far too fucking arrogant. Bloody building missile defence systems in other countries, I'd like to see the US give up their soil - the US cares for nobody but itself, where are your troops? In Georgia? No. Yet Georgia has suffered for many reasons, one because Russia dislikes it's alliance with the US...    what fucking alliance? its a missle defense system that also protects europe aka ur fucking country u prick I'm sure the US wouldn't DREAM of putting any form of offensive weaponry there. cough. -- Posted by churnfulkiler at 8:00 am on Aug. 15, 2008 Quote: from jamesish at 7:57 am on Aug. 15, 2008 It really doesn't surprise me. Prepare for more US stupid things done. ur an idiot. how is that a stupid action? building a system, that defends our allies from missile attacks? -- Posted by mikeyp123 at 8:03 am on Aug. 15, 2008 Quote: from churnfulkiler at 4:00 pm on Aug. 15, 2008 Quote: from jamesish at 7:57 am on Aug. 15, 2008 It really doesn't surprise me. Prepare for more US stupid things done. ur an idiot. how is that a stupid action? building a system, that defends our allies from missile attacks? It isn't there primarily to defend your allies from attack, it's there to cover your own backside from intercontinental nuclear warheads. -- Posted by robdude at 8:03 am on Aug. 15, 2008 Very good idea -- Posted by churnfulkiler at 8:05 am on Aug. 15, 2008 Quote: from mikeyp123 at 8:03 am on Aug. 15, 2008 Quote: from churnfulkiler at 4:00 pm on Aug. 15, 2008 Quote: from jamesish at 7:57 am on Aug. 15, 2008 It really doesn't surprise me. Prepare for more US stupid things done. ur an idiot. how is that a stupid action? building a system, that defends our allies from missile attacks? It isn't there primarily to defend your allies from attack, it's there to cover your own backside from intercontinental nuclear warheads. either way. is it a bad idea to build a system that can defend our allies OR the usa from missile attacks?..its not an offensive weapon syetm. how the fuck is it a bad idea? -- Posted by jamesish at 8:06 am on Aug. 15, 2008 Quote: from SLynch89 at 10:59 am on Aug. 15, 2008 Quote: from jamesish at 7:57 am on Aug. 15, 2008 It really doesn't surprise me. Prepare for more US stupid things done. How on earth is it a stupid move to place interceptor missiles in an allied nation when Russia has repeatedly shown in the last year that they are as militaristic and war hungry as in the days of the soviet union? Tell me how the hell is that a stupid move? Because of world opinion.  We are always being watched like a victim of peeping tom.  We didn't need to go in there.  It makes us look bad. -- Posted by mikeyp123 at 8:07 am on Aug. 15, 2008 Quote: from churnfulkiler at 4:05 pm on Aug. 15, 2008 Quote: from mikeyp123 at 8:03 am on Aug. 15, 2008 Quote: from churnfulkiler at 4:00 pm on Aug. 15, 2008 Quote: from jamesish at 7:57 am on Aug. 15, 2008 It really doesn't surprise me. Prepare for more US stupid things done. ur an idiot. how is that a stupid action? building a system, that defends our allies from missile attacks?    It isn't there primarily to defend your allies from attack, it's there to cover your own backside from intercontinental nuclear warheads. either way. is it a bad idea to build a system that can defend our allies OR the usa from missile attacks?..its not an offensive weapon syetm. how the fuck is it a bad idea? Can you seriously not understand why? Do you honestly think the Russian's will see it that way? What gives you the right to have a defense system so close to Russian borders, without reciprocal measures being taken by the Russians. Refer to the CMC. -- Posted by churnfulkiler at 8:09 am on Aug. 15, 2008 Quote: from mikeyp123 at 8:07 am on Aug. 15, 2008 Quote: from churnfulkiler at 4:05 pm on Aug. 15, 2008 Quote: from mikeyp123 at 8:03 am on Aug. 15, 2008 Quote: from churnfulkiler at 4:00 pm on Aug. 15, 2008 Quote: from jamesish at 7:57 am on Aug. 15, 2008 It really doesn't surprise me. Prepare for more US stupid things done. ur an idiot. how is that a stupid action? building a system, that defends our allies from missile attacks?     It isn't there primarily to defend your allies from attack, it's there to cover your own backside from intercontinental nuclear warheads. either way. is it a bad idea to build a system that can defend our allies OR the usa from missile attacks?..its not an offensive weapon syetm. how the fuck is it a bad idea? Can you seriously not understand why? Do you honestly think the Russian's will see it that way? What gives you the right to have a defense system so close to Russian borders, without reciprocal measures being taken by the Russians. Refer to the CMC. i dont give a fuck what the russians think. if they dont launch any missiles it wont be a god damn problem. do you understand what would happen if russia launched a nuclear missle at europe? -- Posted by robdude at 8:10 am on Aug. 15, 2008 Quote: from jamesish at 11:06 am on Aug. 15, 2008 Quote: from SLynch89 at 10:59 am on Aug. 15, 2008 Quote: from jamesish at 7:57 am on Aug. 15, 2008 It really doesn't surprise me. Prepare for more US stupid things done.    How on earth is it a stupid move to place interceptor missiles in an allied nation when Russia has repeatedly shown in the last year that they are as militaristic and war hungry as in the days of the soviet union? Tell me how the hell is that a stupid move? Because of world opinion. We are always being watched like a victim of peeping tom. We didn't need to go in there. It makes us look bad.  world opinion? what a joke, people will just think of something else to bitch about -- Posted by jamesish at 8:11 am on Aug. 15, 2008 Quote: from robdude at 11:10 am on Aug. 15, 2008 Quote: from jamesish at 11:06 am on Aug. 15, 2008 Quote: from SLynch89 at 10:59 am on Aug. 15, 2008 Quote: from jamesish at 7:57 am on Aug. 15, 2008 It really doesn't surprise me. Prepare for more US stupid things done.   How on earth is it a stupid move to place interceptor missiles in an allied nation when Russia has repeatedly shown in the last year that they are as militaristic and war hungry as in the days of the soviet union? Tell me how the hell is that a stupid move?    Because of world opinion.  We are always being watched like a victim of peeping tom.  We didn't need to go in there.  It makes us look bad. world opinion? what a joke, people will just think of something else to bitch about That they will. -- Posted by mikeyp123 at 8:12 am on Aug. 15, 2008 Quote: from churnfulkiler at 4:09 pm on Aug. 15, 2008 Quote: from mikeyp123 at 8:07 am on Aug. 15, 2008 Quote: from churnfulkiler at 4:05 pm on Aug. 15, 2008 Quote: from mikeyp123 at 8:03 am on Aug. 15, 2008 Quote: from churnfulkiler at 4:00 pm on Aug. 15, 2008 Quote: from jamesish at 7:57 am on Aug. 15, 2008 It really doesn't surprise me. Prepare for more US stupid things done. ur an idiot. how is that a stupid action? building a system, that defends our allies from missile attacks?     It isn't there primarily to defend your allies from attack, it's there to cover your own backside from intercontinental nuclear warheads. either way. is it a bad idea to build a system that can defend our allies OR the usa from missile attacks?..its not an offensive weapon syetm. how the fuck is it a bad idea?    Can you seriously not understand why?    Do you honestly think the Russian's will see it that way?    What gives you the right to have a defense system so close to Russian borders, without reciprocal measures being taken by the Russians.    Refer to the CMC. i dont give a fuck what the russians think. if they dont launch any missiles it wont be a god damn problem. do you understand what would happen if russia launched a nuclear missle at europe? Well thats why you don't understand, for that reason. It's like saying OH, "i'm going to murder your wife, i don't care what you think" Russia launching a missile just gets them in the shit. Mutually assured destruction is what its all about now. -- Posted by churnfulkiler at 8:12 am on Aug. 15, 2008 maybe we should just let them launch a bunch of missiles at cadriff -- Posted by mikeyp123 at 8:13 am on Aug. 15, 2008 Quote: from churnfulkiler at 4:12 pm on Aug. 15, 2008 maybe we should just let them launch a bunch of missiles at cadriff You seem to think the UK is defenseless to missile attack. -- Posted by churnfulkiler at 8:15 am on Aug. 15, 2008 Quote: from mikeyp123 at 8:13 am on Aug. 15, 2008 Quote: from churnfulkiler at 4:12 pm on Aug. 15, 2008 maybe we should just let them launch a bunch of missiles at cadriff You seem to think the UK is defenseless to missile attack. well there not now that we put a defense system in that will fucking protect them but you dont want that added protection for some reason. -- Posted by mikeyp123 at 8:17 am on Aug. 15, 2008 Quote: from churnfulkiler at 4:15 pm on Aug. 15, 2008 Quote: from mikeyp123 at 8:13 am on Aug. 15, 2008 Quote: from churnfulkiler at 4:12 pm on Aug. 15, 2008 maybe we should just let them launch a bunch of missiles at cadriff    You seem to think the UK is defenseless to missile attack. well there not now that we put a defense system in that will fucking protect them but you dont want that added protection for some reason. Usual American bigotry, we have our own ways of dealing with it. RAF / Eurofighter's / Rapier systems would make short work of anything short of nuclear. Plus the Russian's wouldn't launch anything at the UK due the fact that we possess nuclear warheads. -- Posted by churnfulkiler at 8:17 am on Aug. 15, 2008 Well thats why you don't understand, for that reason. It's like saying OH, "i'm going to murder your wife, i don't care what you think" Russia launching a missile just gets them in the shit. Mutually assured destruction is what its all about now. no thats not the same at all. building a defense system is not a reason for russia to launch an attack. if it was on offensive system it would be  completely different story. do u wanna be blown to fucking pieces? -- Posted by churnfulkiler at 8:19 am on Aug. 15, 2008 Quote: from mikeyp123 at 8:17 am on Aug. 15, 2008 Quote: from churnfulkiler at 4:15 pm on Aug. 15, 2008 Quote: from mikeyp123 at 8:13 am on Aug. 15, 2008 Quote: from churnfulkiler at 4:12 pm on Aug. 15, 2008 maybe we should just let them launch a bunch of missiles at cadriff     You seem to think the UK is defenseless to missile attack. well there not now that we put a defense system in that will fucking protect them but you dont want that added protection for some reason. Usual American bigotry, we have our own ways of dealing with it. RAF / Eurofighter's / Rapier systems would make short work of anything short of nuclear. Plus the Russian's wouldn't launch anything at the UK due the fact that we possess nuclear warheads. what makes you so sure that they wouldnt launch nukes at you first? dont you agree that added defense is better for you in the end? -- Posted by mikeyp123 at 8:19 am on Aug. 15, 2008 Quote: from churnfulkiler at 4:17 pm on Aug. 15, 2008  Well thats why you don't understand, for that reason.    It's like saying OH, "i'm going to murder your wife, i don't care what you think"    Russia launching a missile just gets them in the shit. Mutually assured destruction is what its all about now.    no thats not the same at all. building a defense system is not a reason for russia to launch an attack. if it was on offensive system it would be completely different story. do u wanna be blown to fucking pieces? It has the POTENTIAL to be an offensive station. -- Posted by mikeyp123 at 8:21 am on Aug. 15, 2008 Quote: from churnfulkiler at 4:19 pm on Aug. 15, 2008 Quote: from mikeyp123 at 8:17 am on Aug. 15, 2008 Quote: from churnfulkiler at 4:15 pm on Aug. 15, 2008 Quote: from mikeyp123 at 8:13 am on Aug. 15, 2008 Quote: from churnfulkiler at 4:12 pm on Aug. 15, 2008 maybe we should just let them launch a bunch of missiles at cadriff     You seem to think the UK is defenseless to missile attack. well there not now that we put a defense system in that will fucking protect them but you dont want that added protection for some reason.    Usual American bigotry, we have our own ways of dealing with it. RAF / Eurofighter's / Rapier systems would make short work of anything short of nuclear.    Plus the Russian's wouldn't launch anything at the UK due the fact that we possess nuclear warheads. what makes you so sure that they wouldnt launch nukes at you first? dont you agree that added defense is better for you in the end? I'd rather rely on our current system and a non-existent threat than risk tension between Russia and America potentially leading into a war. -- Posted by churnfulkiler at 8:22 am on Aug. 15, 2008 Quote: from mikeyp123 at 8:19 am on Aug. 15, 2008 Quote: from churnfulkiler at 4:17 pm on Aug. 15, 2008     Well thats why you don't understand, for that reason.     It's like saying OH, "i'm going to murder your wife, i don't care what you think"     Russia launching a missile just gets them in the shit. Mutually assured destruction is what its all about now.     no thats not the same at all. building a defense system is not a reason for russia to launch an attack. if it was on offensive system it would be  completely different story. do u wanna be blown to fucking pieces? It has the POTENTIAL to be an offensive station. and russia has the POTENTIAL to attack the uk or the usa. at this point in time its strictly for defense. if it turned to an offensive system i would be on ur side and say its not needed but being that is strictly for  defense of our allies, nato members, and ourselves, i agree with it. -- Posted by goodheart4ever at 8:23 am on Aug. 15, 2008 its a missle defense system that also protects europe aka ur fucking country u prick European countries do have missile defense systems and do you think 10 interceptor missiles will defend Europe from Iran? Pages: 1 2 3  Next